so Kirk begins his speech talking about doing some research and checking the evidence for himself, only to end it with a rant about some natural high he got one day driving his car around...hey Kirk want some real dose of divine experience? take some ayahuasca or lsd...there ain't nothing Christian about them tho!
@psychedellic420. We will know, I just won't be able to say I told you so. I look at Christopher Hitchensen and think this man will soon meet the power he claim didn't exist. I wonder if he's thinking what if I'm wrong. The problem with man is we are finite, therefore we don't know all things. So what if God exist in the information we don't know? I know God exist. My experiences confirms his existence, they're divine encounters that I am grateful for. So I ask you what if you are wrong?
Each and every living atheist will answer to death and when they do. What will be waiting for their response is not going to be science. It's going to be the power of the LIVING GOD.
I think atheism is merely a scape goat for people who would like to live according to their own lustful demands. To reject the belief of a higher ORDER OF DISCIPLINE is easier as oppose to LIVING A LIFE OF DEVOTION. Humanity devote themselves to NOTHING. ITS FOOLISH For humans to try and prove God's existence because He himself will ultimately prove it. I can promise all atheist this one thing. God may not exist to you in this world. BUT HE WILL IN THE NEXT ONE. I BET YOU THAT
Question to Kirk: Why did God design the human male body that the G-spot or prostrate to be six inches inside the anus so that it can only be stimulated by a six inch object pushed up the anus?
Kirk just spent 5:07 explaining Pascal's Wager. Essentially, because there is only a downside if you do not believe and there actually is a god, believe. It is not a compelling argument. Wikipedia "Pascal's Wager" and read more.
There was no debate though, you can't argue in favour of that for which there is no evidence for. I love how Christians want to have these 'debates.' What are they going to debate? LOL It's like arguing whether unicorns exist or not. Come on.
One day, the mystical generation of Jesus and his so called “virgin birth” will be classified along with other fables of equal rank. The people most intent on keeping these ancient fables alive are the men and women who make their livelihoods from the “faith industry.”
Not surprising, these folks have a direct financial interest in supporting religion because they profit from it.
Christians United for Dollars. Hallelujah and Praise the Almighty Dollar !
Oh and! It's as simple as this. If millions upon millions of people believe in a book and millions upon millions of other people don't find a problem with that, what if I chose to believe in "Green Eggs and Ham" By Dr. Seuss? Not a lot of people can imagine the amount of people who would criticize me for that. I could base my religion (which I don't have a religion nor believe in anything) on Dr. Seuss' fantasy. Crazy huh? Waddya say "Believers"?
For the people who claim to see god or that god has spoken to you, all we atheists wanna know is this...where is your proof? oh and who the hell created god? Point made.
The word of God is sharper than any two edged sword.... no argument or debate or ridiculous accusations will ever be able to stand up against the truth.... God's Word is truth.... Thats why they had to have the debate with one rule and one rule only... Dont discuss the BIBLE lol.... Those atheist knew they didnt stand a chance if the Word OF God was brought into the discussion... THANK YOU LORD JESUS FOR BEING ALL POWERFUL AND FOR SHUTTING THE MOUTHS OF THOSE WHO DENY YOU !!!!
Listen Give ear to this GOD the Creator Of Everything Who created you; the Universe and The World--Saith So I the LORD WHO Formed DARKNESS CREATED LIGHT And-the-LUMINARIAS Made Day And NIGHT I ALONE Who Does ALL THESE THINGS I bring forward Life And put an end to it And to everything—I Said So.
This guy is a douche, he makes no scientific argument and just talks about the good old days of being a terrible actor on rubbish show. I'm glad he's found god. That's one les moron on our side
Kirk was an atheist. That was until drugs from his stardom and carbon monoxide from his sports car finally snapped him into his sweet delusion. Poor guy couldn't present any evidence except his hallucinations and his interpretations that it was his god that did it. Tsk tsk tsk. He now only eats Ray's bananas and wanders every village trying to take the job of their resident idiot. Stay on YouTube, my brother. You and Ray make me laugh always! Thanks!
@ebrak47 Atheism is a disease. It is a typo cancer. It kills the soul rapidly and makes you hate everything—everybody, especially religious people. Your soul becomes bitter full of hatred and your mouth full of poison/venom. It contaminates the world; it rejects reasoning it causes harm in the heart of little ones. Most of the time in the heart of ignorant/ irrational people. Atheists become irrational by it. LET’S SAY NO to that cancer—toxic monkeys/apes
@Airlightf Atheism is not a movement nor is it a communicable disease. When questions are sideswiped by "you must believe." or "It is the strength of your faith that is tested," then one starts to doubt things. Finally, after seeking the truth, one is told lies and inconsistencies. Then you have a non-believer. Atheist is merely a word. It would seem that Christians are the dangerous ones: they believe their god belongs to them to the exclusion of non-believers.
The BANANA, and obvious creation, by GOD, to fit in the hands of all great apes, as seen in zoo's around the World,...GOD also intelligently designed the banana so that his favorite ape,... RAY COMFORT (created in his own Image) would make a complete ASS out of himself .............. Ray, as a flunky, your god still loves you, and ..We all are enjoying his sense of humer...as well as many more of your fruit basket insights...........GO ..Ray go..............
Kirk's just using this debate to spread his own faith, not adding to it with arguments whether or not God's real. His conversion wasn't divine, he embraced a delusion that justified his want for a change in lifestyle. We like to think everyone will get their rewards or punishment in the afterlife, but it's all just wishful thinking to keep us living our lives. The RRS totally owned this clip talking truth whilst Kirk and Ray were angling for sympathizers and believers.
@mecca777 Who do you think I am? Your Mama/Daddy? If I was your Mama/Daddy, I would slap you in the face. You don’t prove to me your Mama/Daddy exist. Now, I if was greater than God, then, yeah, I would slap you in the face real good to make you understand you are a hypocrite. But I am not God to prove to you I exist. With your Mama/Daddy, is different, you tell him/her ‘get over here, and he/she does. Bring me that and that, and they bring it/them to you.” ;)
People educated in United States like this two (the red dress woman and the Man sitting next to her). These people only consume what they see, and do not care about the people around them. They forget that they depend on others. These people do not know other cultures were spells are made to kill people. They are not interested in anything else but them. They only eat and shit disregarding everything else. They saddly do not believe in love because don't know about it. Love is GOD.
Cameron is so transparently full of it. Sounds like he was grabbing at anything to keep him afloat when his career fell off, so he found an invisible friend. God loves me even if my TV audience doesn't anymore. Both Cameron and the banana man are an embarrement to modern society.
Sin uses guilt to convince people. God convicts people by His Holy Spirit and Satan uses CONDEMNATION to keep us away from GOD. Satan will try to condemn GOD in your mind and twist the truth of HIS WORD to convince you God is evil and man is good. God's kindness leads us to REPENTANCE. It's SIN that makes a man feel guilty. YES, the very sin we think is "ok" is the same sin that turns around and lashes GUILT at us. John 3:17 maybe you can read it.
wow... he didnt respond to any of the EVIDENCE that was against his case lol...as he said was think...usually the theists talking arent that blatently stupid
In any case I am not discussing the historical reality of Jesus or the Bible. I believe Jesus was a real man. What kind of lunatics would invent such a character? But not a god. I believe there is much historical evidence to be gleaned from the New and Old Testaments and the Dead Sea Scrolls, but the fantasy must be discarded. Are we not growing up as a species beyond such childish notions? Don't we discard Santa Claus when we grow up?
Another one of Kirk's howlers is his limited understanding of micro evolution. I am no scientist, but I can figurte this out pretty easily. Why can't Kirk. He can, but he pretends not to, because that's what his audience wants. He talks about change within species, but says an animal cannot change into another, making facile comments about one animal giving birht to another and showing stupid pictures. Grow up Kirk.
'species' is not a real thing, but rather a concept designed to organise things for the human mind. We say one animal is a certain species, and Kirk says all species are unique and can never change. Every single animal in a 'species' is slightly different from each other, however, which is genetic variation. If one animal born with a twist in its beak survives better than others in a change of environment, he passes on his genes. The next generation all have the twist. The animal has changed.
We may not recognise the new animal as a new species, but it is certainly different from those that came before it. Kirk dismisses this as 'micro evolution within a species' as he must because we see it in nature often enough. Yet the definition of species is entirely man-made and conceptual. I think the difference between a poodle and a Great Dane is enough to classify them as entirely different animals, science does not. My eyes tell me they are, an they are certainly different from a wolf.
The distinction between species is in fact arbitrary, as we need to order things in our mind. A dog isn't a dog because a scientist classes it so, but because it looks and is genetically a dog. Yet a Zebra is very much a horse, and no one thinks of them as the same animal. Older fossil versions of all of these exist. Where have they gone? Why are there no fossils of our present animals beyond a certain point? Did they just spring into being, taking the place of other animals God got sick of?
No. They died out or evolved into our present animals. The fossil record is actually amazingly complete considering the odds against any one animal becoming a fossil. Darwin vastly overestimated the amount of fossils we could discover. What is amazing is how simple a concept this is, and how easy it is to believe, especially when we see SO MUCH evidence of it. We even see it happening in animals around us. We cause it to happen by cross breeding animals and plants. All life changes constantly!
Sorry what you think, does not make it fact. A great Dane and a poodle are still both dogs. The arguement is all based on Macro evolution. No proof has ever shown transitional fossils found for one species Ie. dog slowly over time changing to another species such as a horse. If it were True there would be millions of fossil examples all over the world, showing the transitional forms of development. To date there is NONE.
@amanwithdreams Did you read what I wrote? We only call them dogs. They are more clearly different animals to the eye than a zebra and a horse. All animals and fossils are transitional forms. Go to a museum and ask. Evolution does not call for a horse with a fish fin. That's what Christians think evolution is. And even if there was a horse fossil with a fish fin, you would just call it a creation of god and stick your fingers in your eyes.
@amanwithdreams But why would you ask for that? You have only ever given me ONE BOOK as your proof. If you want some references or proof go down to a Library. They are filled with books. Go to a museum. They are field with exhibits and learned people. Take a few History classes. They are filled with eager students trying to sift through mountains of evidence to discover the past. In any case, any references I could give you would fail to convince you of anything. Your religion binds you.
The truth is you can't give me proof. That's ok, your failure to is all the proof I need.
What makes you think YOU are smarter than I? What makes you think that I haven't studied, gone to a Museum and exhibits. Would you like me to run a list of extremely intelligent people to prove we are not all stupid as you insinuate. Don't bother throwing out a challenge if you cannot fulfill it. I am open to learning the truth in all aspects of life.
@amanwithdreams No i can give you proof. You just won't accept it because it conflicts with your determinant view of the Universe. Jesus is real. His proof denies Jesus, so it must be a lie. Science doesn't work that way. Science looks for the Truth, Jesus dictates it. I never said I was smarter than you. What makes me think you haven't studied is that if you had you would have learned that your religion is one of many fantasies people believe.
@amanwithdreams Based upon a little thing I like to call... reality. Men don't walk on water. Bushes don't speak. Snakes don't either. No one can part a Sea. No one is ressurected. God is not real. These are all silly tales.
No men can't do all those things. BUT a creator who is super natural can't. This is why your logical reasoning to understand God , doesn't work or fit.
The whole question is if you believe in a creator. IF a creator has made the earth and man, well then it's easy to see a supernatural God making man walk on water.
Remember Christian martyrs didn't die for what they believed, they died for what they had seen.
@amanwithdreams Then stop trying to use logic and science and evidence to PROVE your god. If I amnot allowed to use logic to disprove him, then you must admit you only have faith to prove him. I thoguht you Christians were supposed to be proud of you Blind Faith.
I have historical evidence. Jesus is all the proof I need. That's not logical its fact. Acknoledged by NON-Christian historians. Now if we are to ignore what they said, well we might as well ignore what ALL of the historians said.
@amanwithdreams Not sure what historical evidence or historians you refer to. References please? You as the faith person need to provide me as the voice of science and reason with references.
There are several ancient non-Christian sources that report crucial information about Jesus and the apostles. According to the Jewish historian Josephus Jesus was crucified during the reign of Pontius Pilate. Lucian of Samosata, a Greek satirist, states, The Christians, you know, worship a man to this day—the distinguished personage who introduced their novel rites, and was crucified on that account.
Manuscript portions of the Gospel of John, located in the John Ryland Library of Manchester, England and believed to be the oldest known fragment of the New Testament, dated AD 130, within 40 years of the original.
Lukan Papyrus:
"The Lukan papyrus, situated in a library in Paris has been dated to the late 1st century or early 2nd century, so it predates the John papyrus by 20-30 years (Time April 26, 1996, pg.8)."
"The most significant find, however, is a manuscript fragment from the book of Matthew (chapt.26) called the Magdalene Manuscript which has been analyzed by Dr. Carsten Thiede, and also written up in his book The Jesus Papyrus. Using a sophisticated analysis of the handwriting of the fragment by employing a special state-of-the-art microscope, he differentiated between 20 separate micrometer layers of the papyrus, measuring the height and depth of the ink as well as the angle of the stylus
stylus used by the scribe. After this analysis Thiede was able to compare it with other papyri from that period; notably manuscripts found at Qumran (dated to 58 AD), another at Herculaneum (dated prior to 79 AD), a further one from the fortress of Masada (dated to between 73/74 AD), and finally a papyrus from the Egyptian town of Oxyrynchus. The Magdalene Manuscript fragments matches all four, and in fact is almost a twin to the papyrus found in Oxyrynchus, which bears the date of 65/66 AD
concludes that these papyrus fragments of St. Matthew's Gospel were written no later than this date and probably earlier. That suggests that we either have a portion of the original gospel of Matthew, or an immediate copy, which was written while Matthew and the other disciples, and eyewitnesses to the events were still alive. This would be the oldest manuscript portion of our Bible in existence today, one which co-exists with the original writers!
ancient world which can compare to the New Testament. As Sir Frederic Kenyon, former Curator of the British Museum, says:
"The net result of this discovery [of the Chester Beatty Papyri] ... is, in fact, to reduce the gap between the earlier manuscripts and the traditional dates of the New Testament books so far that it becomes negligible in any discussion of their authenticity. No other ancient book has anything like such an early and plentiful testimony to its text." (Sir Frederic G.
Kenyon, The Bible and Modern Scholarship [London: John Murray, 1948], 20, as cited in McDowell, Evidence That Demands A Verdict, p. 49)
Independent archaeological research has solidified the authenticity and the historical reliability of the New Testament. Some of the discoveries include: Luke refers to Lysanias as being the tetrarch of Abilene at the beginning of John the Baptists ministry, circa 27 A. D. (Luke 3:1) Historians accused Luke of being in error, noting that the only Lysanias
known was the one killed in 36 B. C. Now, however, an inscription found near Damascus refers to "Freedman of Lysanias the tetrarch" and is dated from 14 and 29 A. D.
Paul, writing to the Romans, speaks of the city treasurer Erastus (Romans 16:23). A 1929 excavation in Corinth unearthed a pavement inscribed with these words: ERASTVS PRO:AED:P:STRAVIT: ("Erastus curator of public buildings, laid this pavement at his own expense.")
Luke mentions a riot in the city of Ephesus which took place in a theater (Acts 19:23-41). The theater has now been excavated and has a seating capacity of 25,000.
Acts 21 records an incident which broke out between Paul and certain Jews from Asia. These Jews accused Paul of defiling the Temple by allowing Trophimus, a Gentile, to enter it. In 1871, Greek inscriptions were found, now housed in Istanbul which read:
NO FOREIGNER MAY ENTER WITHIN THE BARRICADE WHICH SURROUNDS THE TEMPLE AND
ENCLOSURE. ANYONE WHO IS CAUGHT DOING SO WILL HAVE HIMSELF TO THANK FOR HIS ENSUING DEATH.
Luke addresses Gallio with the title Proconsul (Acts 18:12). A Delphi inscription verifies this when it states, "As Lucius Junius Gallio, my friend, and the Proconsul of Achaia ..."
Luke calls Publicus, the chief man of Malta, "First man of the Island." (Acts 28:7) Inscriptions now found do confirm Publicus as the "First man". (Josh McDowell, The Best of Josh Mcdowell: A Ready Defense.
@amanwithdreams Just as you think i haven't studied the Bible because If I had I couldn't fail to accept it. The difference again is that I accept a wide variety of possible explanations for the reality of the world, you accept one and accept no alternative viewpoint.
@amanwithdreams I haven't studied the Bible? This is the best argument you can make? Fisrtly, one doesn't need to study such a document to know it is nonsense. It is filled with miracles! I ndismiss all such tales because I am a rational person. Secondly, I have studied it enough, quite possibly more than many Christians.
@amanwithdreams What a strange, inconsequential thing to pick up on. No, what I said is that I have read the Bible, but perhaps not studied it in the sense you mean, or as thoroughly as most Christian scholars. It is not my area of expertise. This does not make me unqualified to speak on it. I am perfectly capable of reading Genocide, rape, incest, and cruelty.
@amanwithdreams Christ, Youtube is annoying. I can't tell what posts you are responding to. What is this referring to? Is it just me? Is there a way to tell which posts respond to which? Help!
@amanwithdreams As for proof, it's a lot like trying to give Proof to Ray. One cannot see proof if one will not look at it. Funny, I thought I had given you several examples to prove my points, but I guess not.
@amanwithdreams this is what i think is evidence for evolution: most snakes have vestigial legs, some whales also have vestigial hind legs, and humans have tail bones but no tail. Why is Jesus white? He is from the Middle East.
Kirk and Ray contradict one of the key points of Christianity without noticing, a point which no Christian has ever been able to explain. What happens to all the people who were never exposed to Jesus and never had a chance to find salvation through him? Ray actually says God offers heaven without Jesus to good people, then says the exact opposite a moment later, without batting an eye. That is because the script he adheres to is blindly accepted, despite obvious failures of logic.
I have no doubt that Jesus existed as a man. It seems silly to believe otherwise. I wonder what he would think if he knew what became of his little ministry. The biggest problem with evidence from this period is the domination of Christianity in the region for the first 600 years of the religion and in Europe for the last 2000 years. We know how fond the Christians are of knowledge and records.
There was so much purging and revision of history going on in the history of Christian lands that most records are somewhat suspect. Instead of history we have large periods which are filled with nonsense like the lives of Saints and all their miracles. The moment one of these guys died the fish tales began. Has anyone ever read Navigatio Sancti Brendani, or any other Medieval Saints tales? Great fairy tales, and examples of how Biblical type stories are created. But history? Not even close.
All the books of the New Teatament were written within around 60 years of Jesus Christs death. The dead sea scrolls confirmed all the scripture of the Old testament. They were carbon dated no less than 100BC. In effect thse scrolls confirmed the exact scripture as what we have today.
@amanwithdreams The Dead Sea Scrolls? You have no idea what they are about. They don't confirm much of anything. And here you are relying on Carbon Dating, which is science. Carbon Dating also says the World is 4.6 Billion Years old and confirms evolution, or at least parts of it. You can't have your cake and eat it too. I don't deny the age of the Dead Sea Scrolls, but most literal Bible followers certainly deny Carbon Dating.
Fair point. I used a term you are familiar with. But true carbon dating can be incorrect. They know from the history what time frame they were written in.
Now if I have "NO IDEA' what the dead sea scrolls are about, please enlighten me????
@amanwithdreams Both history AND Carbon Dating confirm their approximate age. But Ray Comfort does not believe in Carbon Dating. As for my comment about the Dead Sea Scrolls forgive me, my comment was too harsh. They are simply documents form the Essene Community of Jews which are mostly religious in nature, and do, it is true, provide much insight into the nature of the Hebrew Bible. But, again, these are documents from zealots, and believers.
@amanwithdreams I ptu no more stock into any accounts in the Dead Sea scrolls of a fantastic nature than I do of any of the Saint's lives that dot the landscape of medieval literature. They are simpy fantastical tales designed to increase people's awe of the God they worship.
@amanwithdreams Religious Books are religious History? Don't you mean book... singular. I thought there was only one religious book. The New Testament Books were written, as you say, not much later than 60 years after Jesus' death, by men whose primary goal was to spread the word and the religion. This is what we in modern times have coined propaganda. The Dead Sea scrolls were written by religious zealots. Again, the bias is very strong and must be considered by a rational student of history.
Once again proof, you no nothing about the Holy Bible. The Bible is made up of 73 individual books, (all together forming one large book- The Bible) making up the old and new testaments. Written by 60 different authors over a 1500 yr period.
Yes to spead the word of Jesus Christ, but if you knew these men who were inspired by the Holy spirit to write, as thier own knoledge would in no way produce the writtings they had come up with. The amount of knowledge is mind blowing.
@amanwithdreams So these are the only books that are reliable? As for the knowledge in the books... well you say you know it pretty well, and so do many other Christians, so it can't be beyond the scope of man to have written. The Bible is so similar to so many other religious texts from that area and time that it is staggering. I do know a little of the Bible, my friend. I know it is divided into books. i have read some of it in Greek. As for 1500 years, I think that may be a wee exaggeration.
Wrong. IF you read it, the whole bible. It has everything on how you need to live your life. Wisdom on all issues of life. The Bible is completely different, as all other text do not believe in Jesus Christ which the whole of the NT is about.
@amanwithdreams Yes including an instruction manual on how to wipe out a whole city of people, massacre the men women and children, and take the young girls (virgins only, please) as slaves, likely sex slaves. That's in Numbers. Great Book you have their.
Go On quote me the passage so I can show you the truth. On a last note. The NEW testament which is the new covenant basically made the OLD testament void. We still believe in it but follow the NEW testament. Which are the teaching of Jesus.
@amanwithdreams The whole book of numbers is a call to genocide! And God called for it! Nothing worse than people hearing voices in their heads and wiping a people out because of it.
@amanwithdreams Numbers 31:17-18 It's a great passage, filled with the love of God. And don't tell me it is metaphor, or that we are meant to follow the New Testament or any of the usual excuses for this sickening piece of filth from a vicious desert tribe.
You must understand that God dealt very harshly because it was through the people of Israel that the Messiah would later come. Satan in his perpetual effort to oppose God, sought to have the people of God fall into false worship and through intermarriage with other people to destroy the messianic line and make not only the promises of God null and void, but destroy means by which the Messiah could be born.
@amanwithdreams You must understand that Hitler dealt very harshly with the Jews because they had been leeching off his people for so long, and holding back the German people from greatness. The Jews, in their perpetual effort to oppose the path of the German people sought to have the German people fall into depravity and poverty and through intermarriage destroy the purity of the Aryan line blah blah blah. How wonderful of you to excuse Genocide. Has a certain ring, don't you think?
@amanwithdreams No, not trying to provoke. You said the Hebrews killed people to keep their blood line pure. you said you agreed with Mel Gibson aboout Jewish guilt in Jesus' death. I never said either of those things. If you tell me you are not a racist I will take your word for it, because I don't think you are a liar. But you did say those things. They sound racist to me.
If this could be accomplished then none would have any hope of deliverance from sin. Therefore, you see in the Old Testament God being very harsh and strict according to the law.
@amanwithdreams Ahh, what a great intellectual exercise it is to excuse the crimes of the followers of God in the Old Testament. Crimes of God is a better way to put it.
It was part of history. It was fact. If you dont like what happended I am sorry, it cant be changed. The OT was a very harsh period for people who didn't obey and follow God.
@amanwithdreams See, I think a rational reaction to the Old Testament would be... ugghhh. what a vicious text. This may be worhtwhile reading as a literary peice, or even a psychological examination of psychosis, but as a fundamental religious text? No wonder people like Ann Coulter call for us to kill the leaders of Islam and convert them all forcibly. What wonderful precedents have been set for her!
@amanwithdreams You can't say it's a peaceful religion when your book is filled with that stuff. Many Christians are inspired by that stuff, whether you like it or admit it. Just like Muslims are inspired by the violent parts of their book, which moderate Muslims read as metaphor.
Yes I can as I know what the Bible teaches as a whole, not specific individual passages, from the OT especially. This is your mis-conception and lack of understanding. Have you heard of any Christian blowing themself up ever????
If you read the Koran, you will learn that all the peaceful parts of Islam, where only in the early years of Mohammads ministy, when he had no power or influence, As his power grew so did his violence and disregard for the true word of God. His peacful pleas were
@amanwithdreams Double Standard! You love the Double Standard, as all Christians do! If they do it they are terrorists and their religion is evil. If we do it he wasn't a true believer. The Bible is full of violence and it has does and will inspire its followers to violence.
@amanwithdreams Here is a lsit of Christian acts of terror. Do not attempt to say these people were not motivated by the Bible or jesus or Christianity. It is at the core of all these deeds.
Bombings in Northern Ireland.
Pogroms in Russia against Russian Jewry. All hatred of Jews in eastern Europe for the last 1000 years. 'He killed Jesus! Get him!'
Yes they all did it. They all claimed to be Christians. YES YES I AGREE THEY ALL DID THOSE THINGS. I AGREE WITH YOU.
Now can i explain. A TRUE Christian DOES NOT KILL. It is goes against GODs law. A true Chirsitan only fights to defend his/her life. THey do not fight for an orgarnisation of any sort. Do you see my understanding.
That is a TRUE Chistian as JESUS NEVER, can I say that again NEVER taught violence or to kill, EVERRRRRRR.
How clear can I make it. YES, YES, YES the bible has horrendous acts of killings, but not in the NT. As you don't know the bible, it just makes you look silly, quoting to me all these historical facts which are irrelevant to how I must live my life as a Christian. As I said they all use religion for thier own Agenda. The words of Jesus to not condone or teach to do these things
You cannot divorce these acts from Christianity. These were all perpetrated by people either acting individually as Christians, or on behalf of nations taht were Christian. It is not fair to blame Islam for the actions of individuals or Islamic nations if you try to wiggle out of Christianty's debts. Double Standard and Hypocrisy of the highest order.
I don't tolerate it, as there is no need. It just shows loss of control right?
I agre the Christians faught, YEs its true, I am not denying it, that would be stupid.
But people of any type of group are easily fooled into believing they are doing the right thing.
My point that you keep missing is that, they are not TRUE TO THIER FAITH. KILLING IS FORBIDDEN AS A CHRISTIAN, NOT AS A MUSLIM. Its not double standard. I agree its wrong. I want you to ..
to gain acceptance at first. Read his biography. Jesus never promoted war, violence or asked to kill in his name. Mohammad did and thats why Muslim do what they do today, it's written hundreds of times in the Koran. So muslims will show you all the peaceful statements in the Koran and claim it is peaceful, hooking you in. Once you are in you can't leave, cause then they can kill you for it. Yes very peaceful. No one in Christianity is Killed or persecuted for leaving.
@amanwithdreams Yes, but Mohammed wasn't saying he was God, and Your God DID promote war, murder and genocide all throughout the Old Testament. There are also many passages in which Jesus calls for violent actions as punishments for whom he perceives to be wicked. that could certainly inspire 'martyrs' to do violence, shooting an abortion Dr. for example.
@amanwithdreams Christians show all the peaceful statements in the Bible, hooking you in, then comes all the murder, stoning, genocide, incest, rape etc.
@amanwithdreams Are you aware of where many of the concepts in the Bible come from? Angels and demons, good vs. evil. Even the devil himself. These are concepts the Hebrews learned in the Babylonian captivity, from Zoroastriansim and other eastern religions. The are was rife with all sorts of competing religions, and the Hebrews were influenced by so much of it. It is not as original as you think.
Whats your point?. Do you truly believe that life on earth and the relationships we have with one another wouldn't be better if we all followed the 10- commandments?
I don't care if the concepts came from the moon, its Jesus teachings that concerm me.
@amanwithdreams My point was a response to your question about how the authors of the Bible could have had such knowledge without being divinely inspired. I was making the point that the concepts in the Bible are not so original as to require divine inspiration. How can you say you don't care if they came from the moon when you were just saying that they were inspired from God?
My point is YOU were pointing to the fact that there were other possible influences of other religions. My point is what has it all led too? Jesus Christ and that's all that matters.
To think one knows the truth is to be truly ignorant. Science does not claim to know any truth, but to try to get as close to it as possible. The existence of old science books full of wildly inaccurate and long since disproven ideas fills me with pride, for it shows how science works. We don't think those things any more, because they have been proven wrong. Religion claims to know the truth and that's final, and it doesn't change. It still believes EVERY idea from 2000 years ago.
@amanwithdreams No, it's faith. For 2000 years it hasn't been PROVED. Nor has it changed. Thank god we have science and the enlightenment or we would still think the world is the centre of the universe, women would still be oppressed, slavery would never have gone away, and all the other lovely things your Christianity backed and/or made money off of. Science hurts religion by exposing its lies and lack of truth. Ask Galileo.
Kirk's use of quotes by famous people also bears examining. He does'nt use them to further any logical point or provide evidence. They are simply repeating, or rather, he is simply repeating what they have to say about the order of the universe proving there must be a designer. A famous person agrees with you. So? Has your belief been repeatedly tested for errors? How is that proof of anything? How do any of Kirk's quotes amount to anything? He is simply name dropping, to dazzle his followers.
You cannot debunk evolution by pointing at mistakes Darwin made. He came up with the idea. Science has built on it, tested it, discarded errors, made new ones, discarded them, and will likely find others and discard them. When was the last time someone tested the Bible, found an error, and then updated it? Oh yeah, infallible word... okay. Well, Darwin was not infallible. No scientist ever claimed he was, so stop pretending that is what we think. Your disingenuousness knows no bounds.
One great line is when Kirk mentions Darwin's statement that if proof of his theories should not be found within 100 years then the theories must be wrong. Creationists love to put Darwin on more of a pedastel than Scientists do, because they can then point out any thing that he was wrong on as absolute proof that his whole theory was wrong. What? A 19th Century scientist said something that was later proven wrong? Show me the evidence of that!
Sorry creationists, but we do not view Darwin as a God as you would like us to do. Much of what he said was wrong. Of course it was! He was doing his work in a time when science was much more ignorant then now. Just because he was wrong on many counts does not invalidate the general premises of his theories. Nor are they entirely his own work. many scientists in the 19th century were working towards the same solution, and his work is combined with that of many other giants.
Kirk is an actor for a living.... "I'm not a christian but I play one on TV"...
namrawmij 1 month ago
good job kirk
galegregory97comcast 2 months ago
so Kirk begins his speech talking about doing some research and checking the evidence for himself, only to end it with a rant about some natural high he got one day driving his car around...hey Kirk want some real dose of divine experience? take some ayahuasca or lsd...there ain't nothing Christian about them tho!
krinoable 2 months ago
When a Believe becomes too strong, something is CREATED - REALITY.
smellyfry 3 months ago
How many times does it have to be said before it's understood by these idiots.
Atheism is Not a belief. It is the rejection of a belief.
Difference.
soskid 4 months ago
Oh sorry, he does raise a point:
Pascal's Wager, which my 10 year old brother can disprove with some logical thinking.
He puts it as though there is his god and atheism, and comfortably forgets about all the other 200 or so gods invented throughout history.
The chances you have of believing in the right god (assuming one of them exists) are like 0.1% and that's very generous.
avrahams1 5 months ago
Kirk doesn't respond to one bit of the claims, all he talks about are feelings and his attitude change that prove absolutely,completely nothing.
avrahams1 5 months ago
@psychedellic420. We will know, I just won't be able to say I told you so. I look at Christopher Hitchensen and think this man will soon meet the power he claim didn't exist. I wonder if he's thinking what if I'm wrong. The problem with man is we are finite, therefore we don't know all things. So what if God exist in the information we don't know? I know God exist. My experiences confirms his existence, they're divine encounters that I am grateful for. So I ask you what if you are wrong?
Mschocolalicious 5 months ago
3:59 - this guy is so adept at shooting himself in the foot I'm surprised he got through the metal detectors...
hmspinaforethisisspa 5 months ago
Each and every living atheist will answer to death and when they do. What will be waiting for their response is not going to be science. It's going to be the power of the LIVING GOD.
Mschocolalicious 6 months ago
@Mschocolalicious Where is your proof?
morkar90 5 months ago
I think atheism is merely a scape goat for people who would like to live according to their own lustful demands. To reject the belief of a higher ORDER OF DISCIPLINE is easier as oppose to LIVING A LIFE OF DEVOTION. Humanity devote themselves to NOTHING. ITS FOOLISH For humans to try and prove God's existence because He himself will ultimately prove it. I can promise all atheist this one thing. God may not exist to you in this world. BUT HE WILL IN THE NEXT ONE. I BET YOU THAT
Mschocolalicious 6 months ago 2
Kirk is so awesome.
IrishMinja 6 months ago
Kirk Cameron is a duche bag.
83redrose83 6 months ago
Question to Kirk: Why did God design the human male body that the G-spot or prostrate to be six inches inside the anus so that it can only be stimulated by a six inch object pushed up the anus?
rcguy69 7 months ago
@rcguy69 LMFAO!!!!!!!!!!!!
speedx50 6 months ago
Kirk just spent 5:07 explaining Pascal's Wager. Essentially, because there is only a downside if you do not believe and there actually is a god, believe. It is not a compelling argument. Wikipedia "Pascal's Wager" and read more.
Expert1911 7 months ago
According to the bible unicorns do exist. Lmfao
markod2002 8 months ago
the unicorn is the Rino
timmmorrison1 7 months ago
There was no debate though, you can't argue in favour of that for which there is no evidence for. I love how Christians want to have these 'debates.' What are they going to debate? LOL It's like arguing whether unicorns exist or not. Come on.
rvggarcon 8 months ago
"Please don't look at this as simply a debate"
THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT IT IS YOU JACKASS
pokerguy94 8 months ago
Too stupid to understand science? Try religion!
pokerguy94 8 months ago
He's explaining what it feels like to go crazy
tireironman 9 months ago
I think this guy admitted that he just lost the debate....
fearfulmatrix 10 months ago
One day, the mystical generation of Jesus and his so called “virgin birth” will be classified along with other fables of equal rank. The people most intent on keeping these ancient fables alive are the men and women who make their livelihoods from the “faith industry.”
Not surprising, these folks have a direct financial interest in supporting religion because they profit from it.
Christians United for Dollars. Hallelujah and Praise the Almighty Dollar !
BenjaminAble2000 11 months ago
During his entire RANT, he presented absolutely ZERO evidence for his position...
Faith - because "thinking" is hard...
SkepticalBliss 1 year ago 6
Oh and! It's as simple as this. If millions upon millions of people believe in a book and millions upon millions of other people don't find a problem with that, what if I chose to believe in "Green Eggs and Ham" By Dr. Seuss? Not a lot of people can imagine the amount of people who would criticize me for that. I could base my religion (which I don't have a religion nor believe in anything) on Dr. Seuss' fantasy. Crazy huh? Waddya say "Believers"?
pillsburydude 1 year ago
For the people who claim to see god or that god has spoken to you, all we atheists wanna know is this...where is your proof? oh and who the hell created god? Point made.
pillsburydude 1 year ago
Christianity its nothing..........The son of God which its the Lord,Its everything.
TOLTECAAZTECA 1 year ago
@TOLTECAAZTECA "its" and "is" are the not the word.
KittyDee29 11 months ago
@KittyDee29 My mistake
TOLTECAAZTECA 11 months ago
being a hedonist doesn't make you an atheist, kirk...
FUwogs 1 year ago
Kirk believed what they believed? Atheism is a lack of belief, I call bullshit AND shinanagans.
StephenWebb1980 1 year ago 2
vs banana design squal = epic title
th3Mouse 1 year ago
Kirk cramon and Ray cumfart are anything but HUMBLE! They lost this debate. Ya, think about it.
rich2rock 1 year ago 2
The word of God is sharper than any two edged sword.... no argument or debate or ridiculous accusations will ever be able to stand up against the truth.... God's Word is truth.... Thats why they had to have the debate with one rule and one rule only... Dont discuss the BIBLE lol.... Those atheist knew they didnt stand a chance if the Word OF God was brought into the discussion... THANK YOU LORD JESUS FOR BEING ALL POWERFUL AND FOR SHUTTING THE MOUTHS OF THOSE WHO DENY YOU !!!!
TruthTeller201 1 year ago
@TruthTeller201
or maybe you shouldn't be able to use circle logic?
you can't say i believe in god because the bible told me so, and i know the bible is true because god said it in the bible.
fucking moron.
eedTV 1 year ago
Sooooo, belief in God is an identity crisis?
whybag 1 year ago
I wonder how many books Kirk included in his, probably very extensive, research?...except the bible of course, which seems to be his only reference.
Also would be very interesting to hear more about that conspiracy, amongst science teachers, that was hinted in the beginning!
NoCode779 1 year ago
Airlightf 1 year ago
This guy is a douche, he makes no scientific argument and just talks about the good old days of being a terrible actor on rubbish show. I'm glad he's found god. That's one les moron on our side
TheDINGO82 1 year ago 2
Kirk was an atheist. That was until drugs from his stardom and carbon monoxide from his sports car finally snapped him into his sweet delusion. Poor guy couldn't present any evidence except his hallucinations and his interpretations that it was his god that did it. Tsk tsk tsk. He now only eats Ray's bananas and wanders every village trying to take the job of their resident idiot. Stay on YouTube, my brother. You and Ray make me laugh always! Thanks!
ebrak47 1 year ago 25
@ebrak47 Just because he woke up and refused to believe in the evolution fairy tale you have to slag him off hahahahahahahaha
ArmageddonComingSoon 1 year ago
@ebrak47 Atheism is a disease. It is a typo cancer. It kills the soul rapidly and makes you hate everything—everybody, especially religious people. Your soul becomes bitter full of hatred and your mouth full of poison/venom. It contaminates the world; it rejects reasoning it causes harm in the heart of little ones. Most of the time in the heart of ignorant/ irrational people. Atheists become irrational by it. LET’S SAY NO to that cancer—toxic monkeys/apes
Airlightf 1 year ago
@Airlightf Atheism is not a movement nor is it a communicable disease. When questions are sideswiped by "you must believe." or "It is the strength of your faith that is tested," then one starts to doubt things. Finally, after seeking the truth, one is told lies and inconsistencies. Then you have a non-believer. Atheist is merely a word. It would seem that Christians are the dangerous ones: they believe their god belongs to them to the exclusion of non-believers.
ebrak47 1 year ago
@ebrak47 you mean he eats Ray's "Banana"
LurchibaldBioshock 9 months ago
he is so weird!!!!
rncoco 1 year ago
touching story, now what evidence did you find when you to study the issue.
chachee99 1 year ago
The BANANA, and obvious creation, by GOD, to fit in the hands of all great apes, as seen in zoo's around the World,...GOD also intelligently designed the banana so that his favorite ape,... RAY COMFORT (created in his own Image) would make a complete ASS out of himself .............. Ray, as a flunky, your god still loves you, and ..We all are enjoying his sense of humer...as well as many more of your fruit basket insights...........GO ..Ray go..............
joewittstock 1 year ago
Kirk's just using this debate to spread his own faith, not adding to it with arguments whether or not God's real. His conversion wasn't divine, he embraced a delusion that justified his want for a change in lifestyle. We like to think everyone will get their rewards or punishment in the afterlife, but it's all just wishful thinking to keep us living our lives. The RRS totally owned this clip talking truth whilst Kirk and Ray were angling for sympathizers and believers.
viridismonasteriense 1 year ago
Kirk was testifying, not really responding to the argument.
mecca777 1 year ago 29
@mecca777 Who do you think I am? Your Mama/Daddy? If I was your Mama/Daddy, I would slap you in the face. You don’t prove to me your Mama/Daddy exist. Now, I if was greater than God, then, yeah, I would slap you in the face real good to make you understand you are a hypocrite. But I am not God to prove to you I exist. With your Mama/Daddy, is different, you tell him/her ‘get over here, and he/she does. Bring me that and that, and they bring it/them to you.” ;)
Airlightf 1 year ago
@mecca777 Yup. Proof one that he has no argument or legs upon which to stand.
StephenWebb1980 1 year ago
@mecca777 That's because he has NO ARGUMENT. Just a Flawed book, anecdotes, Crock-o-ducks and bananas.
H666 1 year ago
@mecca777 what??? Your are as dumb as you response.... Stupid is as Stupid does...
timmmorrison1 7 months ago
why does god make it so serious where you decide right now and the wrong decision is eternity? why does god do that?
cherkas009 1 year ago
People educated in United States like this two (the red dress woman and the Man sitting next to her). These people only consume what they see, and do not care about the people around them. They forget that they depend on others. These people do not know other cultures were spells are made to kill people. They are not interested in anything else but them. They only eat and shit disregarding everything else. They saddly do not believe in love because don't know about it. Love is GOD.
reneverdezas 2 years ago
Oh no! He said at 4:36 that U2 will die!
Bono! Don't leave me! Who will save all the starving children?
You are the only reason I breathe!
The only reason I wake up in the morning!
ZeppelinStorm 2 years ago
Cameron is so transparently full of it. Sounds like he was grabbing at anything to keep him afloat when his career fell off, so he found an invisible friend. God loves me even if my TV audience doesn't anymore. Both Cameron and the banana man are an embarrement to modern society.
holio84 2 years ago
Religious guys = Guilt-trip...
They use guilt to convince you that they're right...
Pinkaugust 2 years ago
Relationship guys= Set free from Guilt trip
Sin uses guilt to convince people. God convicts people by His Holy Spirit and Satan uses CONDEMNATION to keep us away from GOD. Satan will try to condemn GOD in your mind and twist the truth of HIS WORD to convince you God is evil and man is good. God's kindness leads us to REPENTANCE. It's SIN that makes a man feel guilty. YES, the very sin we think is "ok" is the same sin that turns around and lashes GUILT at us. John 3:17 maybe you can read it.
nicknchrist 2 years ago
I fucking hate christians he cant even respond
fuck you kirk and your jesus loving ass
oh yeah fuck you too jesus
MANMADEDISEASE 2 years ago
wow... he didnt respond to any of the EVIDENCE that was against his case lol...as he said was think...usually the theists talking arent that blatently stupid
pawndominance1 2 years ago
In any case I am not discussing the historical reality of Jesus or the Bible. I believe Jesus was a real man. What kind of lunatics would invent such a character? But not a god. I believe there is much historical evidence to be gleaned from the New and Old Testaments and the Dead Sea Scrolls, but the fantasy must be discarded. Are we not growing up as a species beyond such childish notions? Don't we discard Santa Claus when we grow up?
ptolemyauletesXII 2 years ago
Another one of Kirk's howlers is his limited understanding of micro evolution. I am no scientist, but I can figurte this out pretty easily. Why can't Kirk. He can, but he pretends not to, because that's what his audience wants. He talks about change within species, but says an animal cannot change into another, making facile comments about one animal giving birht to another and showing stupid pictures. Grow up Kirk.
ptolemyauletesXII 2 years ago
'species' is not a real thing, but rather a concept designed to organise things for the human mind. We say one animal is a certain species, and Kirk says all species are unique and can never change. Every single animal in a 'species' is slightly different from each other, however, which is genetic variation. If one animal born with a twist in its beak survives better than others in a change of environment, he passes on his genes. The next generation all have the twist. The animal has changed.
ptolemyauletesXII 2 years ago
We may not recognise the new animal as a new species, but it is certainly different from those that came before it. Kirk dismisses this as 'micro evolution within a species' as he must because we see it in nature often enough. Yet the definition of species is entirely man-made and conceptual. I think the difference between a poodle and a Great Dane is enough to classify them as entirely different animals, science does not. My eyes tell me they are, an they are certainly different from a wolf.
ptolemyauletesXII 2 years ago
The distinction between species is in fact arbitrary, as we need to order things in our mind. A dog isn't a dog because a scientist classes it so, but because it looks and is genetically a dog. Yet a Zebra is very much a horse, and no one thinks of them as the same animal. Older fossil versions of all of these exist. Where have they gone? Why are there no fossils of our present animals beyond a certain point? Did they just spring into being, taking the place of other animals God got sick of?
ptolemyauletesXII 2 years ago
No. They died out or evolved into our present animals. The fossil record is actually amazingly complete considering the odds against any one animal becoming a fossil. Darwin vastly overestimated the amount of fossils we could discover. What is amazing is how simple a concept this is, and how easy it is to believe, especially when we see SO MUCH evidence of it. We even see it happening in animals around us. We cause it to happen by cross breeding animals and plants. All life changes constantly!
ptolemyauletesXII 2 years ago
Sorry what you think, does not make it fact. A great Dane and a poodle are still both dogs. The arguement is all based on Macro evolution. No proof has ever shown transitional fossils found for one species Ie. dog slowly over time changing to another species such as a horse. If it were True there would be millions of fossil examples all over the world, showing the transitional forms of development. To date there is NONE.
amanwithdreams 2 years ago
@amanwithdreams Did you read what I wrote? We only call them dogs. They are more clearly different animals to the eye than a zebra and a horse. All animals and fossils are transitional forms. Go to a museum and ask. Evolution does not call for a horse with a fish fin. That's what Christians think evolution is. And even if there was a horse fossil with a fish fin, you would just call it a creation of god and stick your fingers in your eyes.
ptolemyauletesXII 2 years ago
Dont just tell me what you think. Give me references and proof please.
amanwithdreams 2 years ago
@amanwithdreams But why would you ask for that? You have only ever given me ONE BOOK as your proof. If you want some references or proof go down to a Library. They are filled with books. Go to a museum. They are field with exhibits and learned people. Take a few History classes. They are filled with eager students trying to sift through mountains of evidence to discover the past. In any case, any references I could give you would fail to convince you of anything. Your religion binds you.
ptolemyauletesXII 2 years ago
The truth is you can't give me proof. That's ok, your failure to is all the proof I need.
What makes you think YOU are smarter than I? What makes you think that I haven't studied, gone to a Museum and exhibits. Would you like me to run a list of extremely intelligent people to prove we are not all stupid as you insinuate. Don't bother throwing out a challenge if you cannot fulfill it. I am open to learning the truth in all aspects of life.
amanwithdreams 2 years ago
@amanwithdreams Sorry.. on phone :)
ptolemyauletesXII 2 years ago
@amanwithdreams No i can give you proof. You just won't accept it because it conflicts with your determinant view of the Universe. Jesus is real. His proof denies Jesus, so it must be a lie. Science doesn't work that way. Science looks for the Truth, Jesus dictates it. I never said I was smarter than you. What makes me think you haven't studied is that if you had you would have learned that your religion is one of many fantasies people believe.
ptolemyauletesXII 2 years ago
Why is it a fantasy? Based on what studies?
amanwithdreams 2 years ago
@amanwithdreams Based upon a little thing I like to call... reality. Men don't walk on water. Bushes don't speak. Snakes don't either. No one can part a Sea. No one is ressurected. God is not real. These are all silly tales.
ptolemyauletesXII 2 years ago
No men can't do all those things. BUT a creator who is super natural can't. This is why your logical reasoning to understand God , doesn't work or fit.
The whole question is if you believe in a creator. IF a creator has made the earth and man, well then it's easy to see a supernatural God making man walk on water.
Remember Christian martyrs didn't die for what they believed, they died for what they had seen.
amanwithdreams 2 years ago
Sorry I meant to say a creator who is supernatural CAN.
amanwithdreams 2 years ago
@amanwithdreams Then stop trying to use logic and science and evidence to PROVE your god. If I amnot allowed to use logic to disprove him, then you must admit you only have faith to prove him. I thoguht you Christians were supposed to be proud of you Blind Faith.
ptolemyauletesXII 2 years ago
I have historical evidence. Jesus is all the proof I need. That's not logical its fact. Acknoledged by NON-Christian historians. Now if we are to ignore what they said, well we might as well ignore what ALL of the historians said.
amanwithdreams 2 years ago
@amanwithdreams Not sure what historical evidence or historians you refer to. References please? You as the faith person need to provide me as the voice of science and reason with references.
ptolemyauletesXII 2 years ago
There are several ancient non-Christian sources that report crucial information about Jesus and the apostles. According to the Jewish historian Josephus Jesus was crucified during the reign of Pontius Pilate. Lucian of Samosata, a Greek satirist, states, The Christians, you know, worship a man to this day—the distinguished personage who introduced their novel rites, and was crucified on that account.
amanwithdreams 2 years ago
1st or early 2nd century have been presented.
The John Ryland Papyri:
Manuscript portions of the Gospel of John, located in the John Ryland Library of Manchester, England and believed to be the oldest known fragment of the New Testament, dated AD 130, within 40 years of the original.
Lukan Papyrus:
"The Lukan papyrus, situated in a library in Paris has been dated to the late 1st century or early 2nd century, so it predates the John papyrus by 20-30 years (Time April 26, 1996, pg.8)."
amanwithdreams 2 years ago
"The most significant find, however, is a manuscript fragment from the book of Matthew (chapt.26) called the Magdalene Manuscript which has been analyzed by Dr. Carsten Thiede, and also written up in his book The Jesus Papyrus. Using a sophisticated analysis of the handwriting of the fragment by employing a special state-of-the-art microscope, he differentiated between 20 separate micrometer layers of the papyrus, measuring the height and depth of the ink as well as the angle of the stylus
amanwithdreams 2 years ago
stylus used by the scribe. After this analysis Thiede was able to compare it with other papyri from that period; notably manuscripts found at Qumran (dated to 58 AD), another at Herculaneum (dated prior to 79 AD), a further one from the fortress of Masada (dated to between 73/74 AD), and finally a papyrus from the Egyptian town of Oxyrynchus. The Magdalene Manuscript fragments matches all four, and in fact is almost a twin to the papyrus found in Oxyrynchus, which bears the date of 65/66 AD
amanwithdreams 2 years ago
concludes that these papyrus fragments of St. Matthew's Gospel were written no later than this date and probably earlier. That suggests that we either have a portion of the original gospel of Matthew, or an immediate copy, which was written while Matthew and the other disciples, and eyewitnesses to the events were still alive. This would be the oldest manuscript portion of our Bible in existence today, one which co-exists with the original writers!
amanwithdreams 2 years ago
ancient world which can compare to the New Testament. As Sir Frederic Kenyon, former Curator of the British Museum, says:
"The net result of this discovery [of the Chester Beatty Papyri] ... is, in fact, to reduce the gap between the earlier manuscripts and the traditional dates of the New Testament books so far that it becomes negligible in any discussion of their authenticity. No other ancient book has anything like such an early and plentiful testimony to its text." (Sir Frederic G.
amanwithdreams 2 years ago
Kenyon, The Bible and Modern Scholarship [London: John Murray, 1948], 20, as cited in McDowell, Evidence That Demands A Verdict, p. 49)
Independent archaeological research has solidified the authenticity and the historical reliability of the New Testament. Some of the discoveries include: Luke refers to Lysanias as being the tetrarch of Abilene at the beginning of John the Baptists ministry, circa 27 A. D. (Luke 3:1) Historians accused Luke of being in error, noting that the only Lysanias
amanwithdreams 2 years ago
known was the one killed in 36 B. C. Now, however, an inscription found near Damascus refers to "Freedman of Lysanias the tetrarch" and is dated from 14 and 29 A. D.
Paul, writing to the Romans, speaks of the city treasurer Erastus (Romans 16:23). A 1929 excavation in Corinth unearthed a pavement inscribed with these words: ERASTVS PRO:AED:P:STRAVIT: ("Erastus curator of public buildings, laid this pavement at his own expense.")
amanwithdreams 2 years ago
Luke mentions a riot in the city of Ephesus which took place in a theater (Acts 19:23-41). The theater has now been excavated and has a seating capacity of 25,000.
Acts 21 records an incident which broke out between Paul and certain Jews from Asia. These Jews accused Paul of defiling the Temple by allowing Trophimus, a Gentile, to enter it. In 1871, Greek inscriptions were found, now housed in Istanbul which read:
NO FOREIGNER MAY ENTER WITHIN THE BARRICADE WHICH SURROUNDS THE TEMPLE AND
amanwithdreams 2 years ago
ENCLOSURE. ANYONE WHO IS CAUGHT DOING SO WILL HAVE HIMSELF TO THANK FOR HIS ENSUING DEATH.
Luke addresses Gallio with the title Proconsul (Acts 18:12). A Delphi inscription verifies this when it states, "As Lucius Junius Gallio, my friend, and the Proconsul of Achaia ..."
Luke calls Publicus, the chief man of Malta, "First man of the Island." (Acts 28:7) Inscriptions now found do confirm Publicus as the "First man". (Josh McDowell, The Best of Josh Mcdowell: A Ready Defense.
amanwithdreams 2 years ago
The five porticoes of the pool of Bethesda by the Sheep Gate and the pool of Siloam mentioned in John 5:2 and 9:1-7 has now been unearthed.
The pavement (Gabbatha) of John 18:13 and Solomons porch in the Temple precincts (John 10:22-23), have been found.
Archaeologists have unearthed Jacobs well at Sychar. (John 4:5)
An inscription found in Ceasarea confirms Pilates role as the prefect of Judea during the time of Christ.
SHOULD I CONTINUE????
amanwithdreams 2 years ago
@amanwithdreams Just as you think i haven't studied the Bible because If I had I couldn't fail to accept it. The difference again is that I accept a wide variety of possible explanations for the reality of the world, you accept one and accept no alternative viewpoint.
ptolemyauletesXII 2 years ago
When I look at the alternatives. It makes the best sense to me. Lastly you haven't studied the Bible.
amanwithdreams 2 years ago
@amanwithdreams I haven't studied the Bible? This is the best argument you can make? Fisrtly, one doesn't need to study such a document to know it is nonsense. It is filled with miracles! I ndismiss all such tales because I am a rational person. Secondly, I have studied it enough, quite possibly more than many Christians.
ptolemyauletesXII 2 years ago
First you say you haven't studied then you say you have. Which is it?
amanwithdreams 2 years ago
@amanwithdreams What a strange, inconsequential thing to pick up on. No, what I said is that I have read the Bible, but perhaps not studied it in the sense you mean, or as thoroughly as most Christian scholars. It is not my area of expertise. This does not make me unqualified to speak on it. I am perfectly capable of reading Genocide, rape, incest, and cruelty.
ptolemyauletesXII 2 years ago
Sure, fair point, but anyone can read it. But understanding it in its context is another story. This is where the problems with understanding begin.
amanwithdreams 2 years ago
@amanwithdreams Christ, Youtube is annoying. I can't tell what posts you are responding to. What is this referring to? Is it just me? Is there a way to tell which posts respond to which? Help!
ptolemyauletesXII 2 years ago
You can write to me directly. Just click onto my name. The posts go in order of posting, under the reply you have posted to.
amanwithdreams 2 years ago
Not true.I am open to all forms of truth.
amanwithdreams 2 years ago
@amanwithdreams Except the truth of reality.
ptolemyauletesXII 2 years ago
Very funny.
amanwithdreams 2 years ago
@amanwithdreams As for proof, it's a lot like trying to give Proof to Ray. One cannot see proof if one will not look at it. Funny, I thought I had given you several examples to prove my points, but I guess not.
ptolemyauletesXII 2 years ago
@amanwithdreams this is what i think is evidence for evolution: most snakes have vestigial legs, some whales also have vestigial hind legs, and humans have tail bones but no tail. Why is Jesus white? He is from the Middle East.
sschoenh 2 years ago
He he he...
God made man in his image, and man, being a gentleman, returned the compliment.
FiverBeyond 2 years ago
Kirk and Ray contradict one of the key points of Christianity without noticing, a point which no Christian has ever been able to explain. What happens to all the people who were never exposed to Jesus and never had a chance to find salvation through him? Ray actually says God offers heaven without Jesus to good people, then says the exact opposite a moment later, without batting an eye. That is because the script he adheres to is blindly accepted, despite obvious failures of logic.
ptolemyauletesXII 2 years ago
I have no doubt that Jesus existed as a man. It seems silly to believe otherwise. I wonder what he would think if he knew what became of his little ministry. The biggest problem with evidence from this period is the domination of Christianity in the region for the first 600 years of the religion and in Europe for the last 2000 years. We know how fond the Christians are of knowledge and records.
ptolemyauletesXII 2 years ago
There was so much purging and revision of history going on in the history of Christian lands that most records are somewhat suspect. Instead of history we have large periods which are filled with nonsense like the lives of Saints and all their miracles. The moment one of these guys died the fish tales began. Has anyone ever read Navigatio Sancti Brendani, or any other Medieval Saints tales? Great fairy tales, and examples of how Biblical type stories are created. But history? Not even close.
ptolemyauletesXII 2 years ago
Religious books are religious history.
All the books of the New Teatament were written within around 60 years of Jesus Christs death. The dead sea scrolls confirmed all the scripture of the Old testament. They were carbon dated no less than 100BC. In effect thse scrolls confirmed the exact scripture as what we have today.
amanwithdreams 2 years ago
@amanwithdreams The Dead Sea Scrolls? You have no idea what they are about. They don't confirm much of anything. And here you are relying on Carbon Dating, which is science. Carbon Dating also says the World is 4.6 Billion Years old and confirms evolution, or at least parts of it. You can't have your cake and eat it too. I don't deny the age of the Dead Sea Scrolls, but most literal Bible followers certainly deny Carbon Dating.
ptolemyauletesXII 2 years ago
Fair point. I used a term you are familiar with. But true carbon dating can be incorrect. They know from the history what time frame they were written in.
Now if I have "NO IDEA' what the dead sea scrolls are about, please enlighten me????
amanwithdreams 2 years ago
@amanwithdreams Both history AND Carbon Dating confirm their approximate age. But Ray Comfort does not believe in Carbon Dating. As for my comment about the Dead Sea Scrolls forgive me, my comment was too harsh. They are simply documents form the Essene Community of Jews which are mostly religious in nature, and do, it is true, provide much insight into the nature of the Hebrew Bible. But, again, these are documents from zealots, and believers.
ptolemyauletesXII 2 years ago
@amanwithdreams I ptu no more stock into any accounts in the Dead Sea scrolls of a fantastic nature than I do of any of the Saint's lives that dot the landscape of medieval literature. They are simpy fantastical tales designed to increase people's awe of the God they worship.
ptolemyauletesXII 2 years ago
@amanwithdreams Religious Books are religious History? Don't you mean book... singular. I thought there was only one religious book. The New Testament Books were written, as you say, not much later than 60 years after Jesus' death, by men whose primary goal was to spread the word and the religion. This is what we in modern times have coined propaganda. The Dead Sea scrolls were written by religious zealots. Again, the bias is very strong and must be considered by a rational student of history.
ptolemyauletesXII 2 years ago
Once again proof, you no nothing about the Holy Bible. The Bible is made up of 73 individual books, (all together forming one large book- The Bible) making up the old and new testaments. Written by 60 different authors over a 1500 yr period.
Yes to spead the word of Jesus Christ, but if you knew these men who were inspired by the Holy spirit to write, as thier own knoledge would in no way produce the writtings they had come up with. The amount of knowledge is mind blowing.
amanwithdreams 2 years ago
@amanwithdreams So these are the only books that are reliable? As for the knowledge in the books... well you say you know it pretty well, and so do many other Christians, so it can't be beyond the scope of man to have written. The Bible is so similar to so many other religious texts from that area and time that it is staggering. I do know a little of the Bible, my friend. I know it is divided into books. i have read some of it in Greek. As for 1500 years, I think that may be a wee exaggeration.
ptolemyauletesXII 2 years ago
Wrong. IF you read it, the whole bible. It has everything on how you need to live your life. Wisdom on all issues of life. The Bible is completely different, as all other text do not believe in Jesus Christ which the whole of the NT is about.
amanwithdreams 2 years ago
@amanwithdreams Yes including an instruction manual on how to wipe out a whole city of people, massacre the men women and children, and take the young girls (virgins only, please) as slaves, likely sex slaves. That's in Numbers. Great Book you have their.
ptolemyauletesXII 2 years ago
Go On quote me the passage so I can show you the truth. On a last note. The NEW testament which is the new covenant basically made the OLD testament void. We still believe in it but follow the NEW testament. Which are the teaching of Jesus.
amanwithdreams 2 years ago
@amanwithdreams The whole book of numbers is a call to genocide! And God called for it! Nothing worse than people hearing voices in their heads and wiping a people out because of it.
ptolemyauletesXII 2 years ago
@amanwithdreams Numbers 31:17-18 It's a great passage, filled with the love of God. And don't tell me it is metaphor, or that we are meant to follow the New Testament or any of the usual excuses for this sickening piece of filth from a vicious desert tribe.
ptolemyauletesXII 2 years ago
You must understand that God dealt very harshly because it was through the people of Israel that the Messiah would later come. Satan in his perpetual effort to oppose God, sought to have the people of God fall into false worship and through intermarriage with other people to destroy the messianic line and make not only the promises of God null and void, but destroy means by which the Messiah could be born.
amanwithdreams 2 years ago
@amanwithdreams You must understand that Hitler dealt very harshly with the Jews because they had been leeching off his people for so long, and holding back the German people from greatness. The Jews, in their perpetual effort to oppose the path of the German people sought to have the German people fall into depravity and poverty and through intermarriage destroy the purity of the Aryan line blah blah blah. How wonderful of you to excuse Genocide. Has a certain ring, don't you think?
ptolemyauletesXII 2 years ago
No. You know that is not true.
amanwithdreams 2 years ago
@amanwithdreams And now you expose yourself as a more general racist as well as anti-semitic.
ptolemyauletesXII 2 years ago
That is a joke right.
amanwithdreams 2 years ago
@amanwithdreams Sorry, because of the way these things appear on Youtube I don't know what you are referring to. What's a joke?
ptolemyauletesXII 2 years ago
I am not anti-semitic or racist. Are you just trying to provoke me?
amanwithdreams 2 years ago
@amanwithdreams No, not trying to provoke. You said the Hebrews killed people to keep their blood line pure. you said you agreed with Mel Gibson aboout Jewish guilt in Jesus' death. I never said either of those things. If you tell me you are not a racist I will take your word for it, because I don't think you are a liar. But you did say those things. They sound racist to me.
ptolemyauletesXII 2 years ago
Todays society has stopped allowing people to have an opinion and speak about it. I thought we had freedom of speech. Yeah right.
amanwithdreams 2 years ago
If this could be accomplished then none would have any hope of deliverance from sin. Therefore, you see in the Old Testament God being very harsh and strict according to the law.
amanwithdreams 2 years ago
@amanwithdreams Ahh, what a great intellectual exercise it is to excuse the crimes of the followers of God in the Old Testament. Crimes of God is a better way to put it.
ptolemyauletesXII 2 years ago
I dont make excuses. What happened, happened.
It was part of history. It was fact. If you dont like what happended I am sorry, it cant be changed. The OT was a very harsh period for people who didn't obey and follow God.
amanwithdreams 2 years ago
@amanwithdreams See, I think a rational reaction to the Old Testament would be... ugghhh. what a vicious text. This may be worhtwhile reading as a literary peice, or even a psychological examination of psychosis, but as a fundamental religious text? No wonder people like Ann Coulter call for us to kill the leaders of Islam and convert them all forcibly. What wonderful precedents have been set for her!
ptolemyauletesXII 2 years ago
@amanwithdreams You can't say it's a peaceful religion when your book is filled with that stuff. Many Christians are inspired by that stuff, whether you like it or admit it. Just like Muslims are inspired by the violent parts of their book, which moderate Muslims read as metaphor.
ptolemyauletesXII 2 years ago
Yes I can as I know what the Bible teaches as a whole, not specific individual passages, from the OT especially. This is your mis-conception and lack of understanding. Have you heard of any Christian blowing themself up ever????
If you read the Koran, you will learn that all the peaceful parts of Islam, where only in the early years of Mohammads ministy, when he had no power or influence, As his power grew so did his violence and disregard for the true word of God. His peacful pleas were
amanwithdreams 2 years ago
@amanwithdreams Double Standard! You love the Double Standard, as all Christians do! If they do it they are terrorists and their religion is evil. If we do it he wasn't a true believer. The Bible is full of violence and it has does and will inspire its followers to violence.
ptolemyauletesXII 2 years ago
@amanwithdreams Here is a lsit of Christian acts of terror. Do not attempt to say these people were not motivated by the Bible or jesus or Christianity. It is at the core of all these deeds.
Bombings in Northern Ireland.
Pogroms in Russia against Russian Jewry. All hatred of Jews in eastern Europe for the last 1000 years. 'He killed Jesus! Get him!'
The Lord's resistance Army in Uganda
The Ku Klux Klan targetting Jews and Catholics
ptolemyauletesXII 2 years ago
Yes they all did it. They all claimed to be Christians. YES YES I AGREE THEY ALL DID THOSE THINGS. I AGREE WITH YOU.
Now can i explain. A TRUE Christian DOES NOT KILL. It is goes against GODs law. A true Chirsitan only fights to defend his/her life. THey do not fight for an orgarnisation of any sort. Do you see my understanding.
amanwithdreams 2 years ago
That is a TRUE Chistian as JESUS NEVER, can I say that again NEVER taught violence or to kill, EVERRRRRRR.
How clear can I make it. YES, YES, YES the bible has horrendous acts of killings, but not in the NT. As you don't know the bible, it just makes you look silly, quoting to me all these historical facts which are irrelevant to how I must live my life as a Christian. As I said they all use religion for thier own Agenda. The words of Jesus to not condone or teach to do these things
amanwithdreams 2 years ago
@amanwithdreams Attacks on abortion clinics. God wants us to save those unborn babies.
Christian Identity - lovely people... look them up
In fact, most racist groups in the USA are entirely motivated by Christian and Biblical doctrine
Christian militia forces in Lebanon, killing for Christ
Forced conversion at a sword point of Easern Europe and Russia, by Teutonic Knights and Swedish invaders.
Church's condoning and even backing of forced conversion or slaughter of American tribes
ptolemyauletesXII 2 years ago
@amanwithdreams The religious WArs of the 17th Century
The Fucking Crusades
The Fucking Inquisition for the third time
You cannot divorce these acts from Christianity. These were all perpetrated by people either acting individually as Christians, or on behalf of nations taht were Christian. It is not fair to blame Islam for the actions of individuals or Islamic nations if you try to wiggle out of Christianty's debts. Double Standard and Hypocrisy of the highest order.
ptolemyauletesXII 2 years ago
Dont start swearing or I will leave.
I don't tolerate it, as there is no need. It just shows loss of control right?
I agre the Christians faught, YEs its true, I am not denying it, that would be stupid.
But people of any type of group are easily fooled into believing they are doing the right thing.
My point that you keep missing is that, they are not TRUE TO THIER FAITH. KILLING IS FORBIDDEN AS A CHRISTIAN, NOT AS A MUSLIM. Its not double standard. I agree its wrong. I want you to ..
amanwithdreams 2 years ago
understand that their actions are not what Christianity preaches, or Jesus from the New Testament. That is thier own stupid actions.
THIS IS MY CHALLENGE; SHOW ME ONCE WHERE JESUS KILLS OR TELLS SOMEONE TO KILL?
amanwithdreams 2 years ago
to gain acceptance at first. Read his biography. Jesus never promoted war, violence or asked to kill in his name. Mohammad did and thats why Muslim do what they do today, it's written hundreds of times in the Koran. So muslims will show you all the peaceful statements in the Koran and claim it is peaceful, hooking you in. Once you are in you can't leave, cause then they can kill you for it. Yes very peaceful. No one in Christianity is Killed or persecuted for leaving.
amanwithdreams 2 years ago
@amanwithdreams Yes, but Mohammed wasn't saying he was God, and Your God DID promote war, murder and genocide all throughout the Old Testament. There are also many passages in which Jesus calls for violent actions as punishments for whom he perceives to be wicked. that could certainly inspire 'martyrs' to do violence, shooting an abortion Dr. for example.
ptolemyauletesXII 2 years ago
@amanwithdreams Christians show all the peaceful statements in the Bible, hooking you in, then comes all the murder, stoning, genocide, incest, rape etc.
ptolemyauletesXII 2 years ago
@amanwithdreams Are you aware of where many of the concepts in the Bible come from? Angels and demons, good vs. evil. Even the devil himself. These are concepts the Hebrews learned in the Babylonian captivity, from Zoroastriansim and other eastern religions. The are was rife with all sorts of competing religions, and the Hebrews were influenced by so much of it. It is not as original as you think.
ptolemyauletesXII 2 years ago
Whats your point?. Do you truly believe that life on earth and the relationships we have with one another wouldn't be better if we all followed the 10- commandments?
I don't care if the concepts came from the moon, its Jesus teachings that concerm me.
amanwithdreams 2 years ago
@amanwithdreams My point was a response to your question about how the authors of the Bible could have had such knowledge without being divinely inspired. I was making the point that the concepts in the Bible are not so original as to require divine inspiration. How can you say you don't care if they came from the moon when you were just saying that they were inspired from God?
ptolemyauletesXII 2 years ago
My point is YOU were pointing to the fact that there were other possible influences of other religions. My point is what has it all led too? Jesus Christ and that's all that matters.
amanwithdreams 2 years ago
@amanwithdreams But you say it was all inspired by God. Clearly it was not, but by other human fantasy inventors.
ptolemyauletesXII 2 years ago
Another assumption form you.
amanwithdreams 2 years ago
What about my question regarding the 10 commandments?
amanwithdreams 2 years ago
To think one knows the truth is to be truly ignorant. Science does not claim to know any truth, but to try to get as close to it as possible. The existence of old science books full of wildly inaccurate and long since disproven ideas fills me with pride, for it shows how science works. We don't think those things any more, because they have been proven wrong. Religion claims to know the truth and that's final, and it doesn't change. It still believes EVERY idea from 2000 years ago.
ptolemyauletesXII 2 years ago
For 2000yrs the truth hasn't been disproved. That's science.
amanwithdreams 2 years ago
@amanwithdreams No, it's faith. For 2000 years it hasn't been PROVED. Nor has it changed. Thank god we have science and the enlightenment or we would still think the world is the centre of the universe, women would still be oppressed, slavery would never have gone away, and all the other lovely things your Christianity backed and/or made money off of. Science hurts religion by exposing its lies and lack of truth. Ask Galileo.
ptolemyauletesXII 2 years ago
Kirk's use of quotes by famous people also bears examining. He does'nt use them to further any logical point or provide evidence. They are simply repeating, or rather, he is simply repeating what they have to say about the order of the universe proving there must be a designer. A famous person agrees with you. So? Has your belief been repeatedly tested for errors? How is that proof of anything? How do any of Kirk's quotes amount to anything? He is simply name dropping, to dazzle his followers.
ptolemyauletesXII 2 years ago
You cannot debunk evolution by pointing at mistakes Darwin made. He came up with the idea. Science has built on it, tested it, discarded errors, made new ones, discarded them, and will likely find others and discard them. When was the last time someone tested the Bible, found an error, and then updated it? Oh yeah, infallible word... okay. Well, Darwin was not infallible. No scientist ever claimed he was, so stop pretending that is what we think. Your disingenuousness knows no bounds.
ptolemyauletesXII 2 years ago
One great line is when Kirk mentions Darwin's statement that if proof of his theories should not be found within 100 years then the theories must be wrong. Creationists love to put Darwin on more of a pedastel than Scientists do, because they can then point out any thing that he was wrong on as absolute proof that his whole theory was wrong. What? A 19th Century scientist said something that was later proven wrong? Show me the evidence of that!
ptolemyauletesXII 2 years ago
Sorry creationists, but we do not view Darwin as a God as you would like us to do. Much of what he said was wrong. Of course it was! He was doing his work in a time when science was much more ignorant then now. Just because he was wrong on many counts does not invalidate the general premises of his theories. Nor are they entirely his own work. many scientists in the 19th century were working towards the same solution, and his work is combined with that of many other giants.
ptolemyauletesXII 2 years ago