So true; pork, shellfish, underwear, poly-cotton blends and abolition of slavery are all obviously immoral. The judeo-christian god, muderer of babies and punisher of the innocent is obviously the source of morality.
more typical religious riddles and blabbing away! human chromosome 2 is not a fucking riddle there is nothing to presuppose here. it is what it is.
the hypocrisy is nearly killing me here. you say both parties are tyring to prove right and wrong and there is no right and wrong yet jesus is the way the truth and the light. you like most religious folks, liek to word smith everything, and create the rules for a conversation so that the atheist view is "self refuting". sorry buddy show facts!
My dear brother in Christ, you must quit wasting your time trying to prove that God exists. No one needs proof that he exists. His existance is axiomatic or self evident. When the Lord said "the fool says in his heart there is no god" the word fool means willingly ignorant. You already know that is the sinner's problem. However, you must also remember that he is blinded by his sin. Would you get angry with a blind man for tripping over what cannot see? The same applies to the sinner....
@jerico641 No, the issue is your rebellious heart. The fact that you can make that statement proves that your hatred of God and his righteousness has made you "willingly ignorant" (2 Pet 3:5) of the abundance of prophetic, historic, scientific, and experiential evidence that Jesus Christ is Lord. But if there is no God, why should we care about evidence? How do you learn and persuade and reason with someone if we're all just chemical reactions in a blind, random struggle for life?
Where is the evidence? The Bible is just as much evidence as the Rig Veda, the Epic of Gilgamesh or the Koran. What prophecies that are not vague, such as "there will be wars" came true? Which one came true outside the bible and how is it proof that jesus is god? Isreal, men made isreal, it just didn't appear out of the ground? Historic evidence? Jesus exists only in the bible some non canonical gospels and one line in jophesus? At least Muhammed is independently verified.
@indiankingkong Here you betray your own ignorance of the Bible; e.g., the Bible gives the year, the tribe, even the city from which the Messiah would come. It spoke of how he was born, where he would be born, what time he would be born in vivid detail. There are at least 48 prophecies of his first coming, and more of his second. But look at your assumptions...why isn't the Bible a historical document? Because it disagrees with YOUR assumptions.
@indiankingkong Look how biased you are...there is plethora more evidence of Jesus Christ life, death, and resurrection: from fulfilled prophecy, archaeological confirmation, internal consistency of 40 authors from 1900 years across three continents...extrabiblical witnesses like Josephus (whom you discount), tacitus (whom you fail to mention)...
As i said before, Aside from one sentence in Josephus, there isn't a shred off evidence that Jesus existed. If there is, prove it. Provide it.
There certainly isn't any archaeological evidence, if there was, it would be heralded as the greatest discovery of the modern age. There would be Nobel prizes. Etc.
@indiankingkong Rather, you put the Koran...written by ONE man who suffered from either demon possession or some form of epilepsy...and claimed to have gotten the revelation from an angel (Gabriel). The Koran contradicts itself, plagiarizes sections of the Old Testament, and claims there is a swamp where the sun descends every day. But THAT is "independently verified?" By whom? Christ-rejecting heretics and rebels like yourself who want to exuse their own sin and ignore hell? Hardly..
Where is the evidence? The Bible is just as much evidence as the Rig Veda, the Epic of Gilgamesh or the Koran. What prophecies that are not vague, such as "there will be wars" came true? Which one came true outside the bible and how is it proof that Jesus is god? Israel, men made Israel, it just didn't appear out of the ground? Historic evidence? Jesus exists only in the bible some non canonical gospels and one line in Josephus? At least Muhammad is independently verified.
@Republica101 That's easy--His name is The Lord Jesus Christ. "And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory." (1 Tim 3:16)
@JesusIsUrSaviour you can't prove that. At all. The koran says the same about allah, and frankly, the deist god makes sense, while the christian god does not.
@Republica101 Oh yes, I can. Here's one way--as a good empiricist, I have read the Bible and obeyed its command to repent and put my faith and trust in the risen Christ to save my soul. When I did that my life radically changed just as the Bible said it would. The Koran offers contradictions within itself, with the Bible, and with nature. I have read the Koran--it offers no hope of redemption through a risen Saviour, no assurance of forgiveness of sins.
@JesusIsUrSaviour You call that empiriscism? You assumed the Bible was true instantly! Of course your going to think your life changed, you wanted it to! What about the Gita? The Gita at least makes coherent sense. All three of the abrahamic religions worship a god who doesn't make any sense, and yes, the bible does have contradictions. YOU just wont take off your "Jesus-goggles" long enough to see them.
@Republica101 Sorry, sir, but you're the one who is so stubborn in heart that now, you have to discredit my own testimony. Jesus Christ saved my soul and changed my life, and frankly, your bitter musings about are desperate attempts to try to explain away the truth. "There is no darkness , nor shadow of turning, where the workers of iniquity may hide themselves".
@JesusIsUrSaviour You know, if you converted to frickin scientology, you would have felt the EXACT same way about your life being changed, if we ignore the money thing.
right and wrong is determined upon what is the best for the genetics of the species or on a smmaller note the for the individual. You would not go out an kill someone because someone might make offence to that and come back and get you thats y we have emotions aswell creating attachments to our lives. This whole premise fails DEBUNKED
I dont understand how you get to your assumptions tho as you actually make a logical falicy. you state that the bible is a logical preposition because you can see it in your daily lives..... THAT IS WHAT SCIENCE IS U BUNGHOLE gtf off youtube
@WilkoPhilip First, I am not sure what you are referring to here. Without Biblical presuppositions, I argue, knowledge would not be possible. That was my point. For example, you are trying to prove me wrong here--you assume there is a right answer and that using argument and logic you can persuade someone else to that correct answer. Which worldview supports this notion: Biblical or naturalistic? If we are matter and energy, what makes something correct or incorrect?
@WilkoPhilip Furthermore, I would contend that the "science" you cling to here would not be possible without the God of the Bible. To conduct scientific experiments, for example, you must ASSUME that the laws of chemistry, physics, nature, etc. are constant; i.e., the experiment you did on Tuesday, under the same conditions, should yield the same result on Wednesday. Which worldview supports that: the Biblical, in which God promised to uphold all things by the word of his power (Heb 1:3)
@WilkoPhilip including the natural laws and cycles (Gen 8:22). OR the naturalistic/evolutionary worldview where everything is in constant change by blind, natural processes? Which provides a rational basis for the uniformity we see in nature that makes knowledge possible? You can't have your cake and eat it too--you can't rely on biblical presuppositions to disprove the Bible. You only refute yourself.
i understand the way you look at the world but how do you know that the christian god is the right 1? i mean noahs flood would wipe out all plant life and all sea life leaving no food for when the land the boat/vessel aswell as the earth being 6000 years old (radieometric dating ((nort carbon dating))) basicaly how do you not know that muslims pray to the same god? or hundists? if he never comes and interacts with us phisicaly how do we know....?
@WilkoPhilip You have a lot of questions here; let me pick up on the last one for now. God DID come and interact with us--physically incarnate as Jesus Christ--and in the written record of his word. God interacts with me every day. I know God personally. He saved and changed my life twelve years ago. Be the good empiricist you claim to be--I would challenge you (if you haven't) to read some Suras of the Koran against the gospel of John in the Bible. And SEE which one is from God...
@WilkoPhilip Granted, that is not the full answer to your question, but an honest starting point...Hindu texts, for one, never claim inspiration like the Bible. And the Koran contradicts itself, let alone the Biblical God it claims to come from.
@JesusIsUrSaviour simply right i do say islam hcontradicts itself and in the same context so does the bible i mean srsly islam has more scientific knowledge than the bible and the bible totaly says something like a bat is a bird when clearly not.
so basically what you're trying to do is divert the debate to something that makes no sense and is completely irrelevant to theism (epistemology) so that it looks you are right. right and wrong are human concepts, and they're VERY subjective. therefore, this video is completely pointless because you're presupposing that right and wrong can only come from a god, your god specifically (I could invent millions of other possible gods with different definitions for right and wrong).
I don't understand how you managed to record audio this strange... did you put a cheap microphone up to your phone? Did you record a clean source but compress it to the lowest possible quality? I DON'T UNDERSTAND!
If we assume that the bible is true, and that god exists, then it is still humans who decide whether something is good or not. God might claim that something is good, but it is up to people to decide whether to agree or dissagree with this claim.
Gods opinion would be no more valid then the opinion of the lowest sinner.
@Jessymandias No, God's word is truth. If it is truth, then your refusal to agree with the truth would make you a liar or a rebel. Does gravity depend on your consent? No. This post-modern reasoning would preclude anyone from knowing anything if you follow your premise to its conclusion.
I'm not sure what moral highground you suppose you are taking when you are referencing a book that condones slavery and genocide, not to mention the new testament message of how "faith and not works" gets you into heaven. When anyone believes that their god is on their side, nothing they do is wrong and everything they do is permissible.
@MrRedDragon First, the bible does not condone slavery or genocide. Second, the gospel is faith in the finished work of Jesus Christ, not easy-believism as you promote. Your argument is really just a straw man. I suggest you read the Bible if you have not.
@JesusIsUrSaviour I have been reading the bible and I did find that genocide and slavery are not only condoned but commanded by God. In the Old Testament, Moses leads God's people on a rampage through the middle east, wiping out just about every tribe they came into contact with (save for the few they merely occupied the lands of); killing every man, woman, and child, yet keeping the virgin girls for themselves as property.
@JesusIsUrSaviour Nowhere in the bible does it say anything disparaging about the practice of slavery, the only restriction being that worshipers of God should not be slaves. Accounts of slavery in the bible include slaves belonging to Abraham and his family, the slaves the Israelites took under Moses' leadership, and the many accounts in the letters by Paul and Peter state clearly that slaves should obey their masters with respect and fear. So I'm pretty sure the Bible condones slavery.
@JesusIsUrSaviour I know not every theist thinks that way about their god's opinion in them, but it's not too much of a stretch to say that if you are certain you are right, then you aren't thinking you are wrong in your actions.
The issue is not evidence? Evidence is ALWAYS required, and when empirical evidence goes against a "worldview" that set of assumptions must be changed or thrown out altogether (as in the case of creationism). I contend that mankind is the author of morality, and therefore, we are able to determine right from wrong. Even notions of "right" and "wrong" are human constructs themselves. Morality, is therefore, somewhat subjective. So.. talking snakes and virgin births are the "rational" foundation?
@naejimba Why is evidence always required? Even that is a presupposition. See, you begin with beliefs even about how an argument should be conducted, what is rational, etc. If morality is subjective, then would it be ok for a stranger to shoot you right now? The talking snakes are figments of your imagination--do try to stay relevant and not sounding like a poor Dawkins-impersonation.
@JesusIsUrSaviour, it is not my beliefs on how an argument should be conducted, or what is rational, or even that evidence is always required.. but rather this is agreed upon by all of humanity except, apparently, you. In any other area, you require empirical evidence, why should religion be any different? Your example of someone shooting me is idiotic. You have no idea what subjective morality means. I might sound like a poor Dawkins impersonation, but you sound like a retard.
How can you fail so hard? You make the presupposition of the existence of 'true' and 'right' then you read the bible came to the conclusion that it's 'true' (awesome mental gymnastics aside) and then use it to support your initial presupposition.
What do you think you've shown with this junkyard of an argument? It's hopelessly circular!
@infinit888 Well, first, you beg the question in your comment. I think I have shown that the Bible is a reasonable and rational basis for truth. You, however, have made a meaningless diatribe. Please answer then, how does right and wrong comport with atheism? Why should there be a right answer in an atheist universe?
@JesusIsUrSaviour In which universe does pointing out that YOU are begging the question make ME beg the question?! Probably in the same universe your god exists huh.
No you haven't! To call the bible true (whatever rationalization you imply to make that statement) is to presuppose there is such a thing as 'truth' to begin with.
You are conflating descriptive statements (what is) with prescriptive statements (what ought to be) so I don't know what you want. Be specific.
@infinit888 I want to point out your inconsistency. You come after me for presupposing there is such a thing as truth. In effect, you are accusing me of being wrong because there is no truth (as you say) while you make a statement that presupposes you are right and I am wrong. Do you see a problem here? If there is no truth, then what ground do you have to stand on to call me wrong? Your implicit cry for relativity is self-refuting.I suggest you repent and trust Christ as your Saviour.
@JesusIsUrSaviour I never said there is no 'truth' but as long as you don't define that therm and explain what you mean by it I won't come out and say it exists either.
I'm not presupposing you're wrong. I'm saying that based on logic, your (junkyard of an) argument is unsound. It does not follow.
If you don't care for logic and how it shows your argument is unsound be my guest but don't expect anyone to take you seriously.
@Magnius87 Read the bible sir before you pull out Richard Dawkins' Top Ten Misunderstood Passages to Continue his Atheist Tantrum towards his Creator.
1611, king james writes his version of the bible. that was four hundred years ago, one thousand, five hundred and some odd years after the fact of the 'new testament'.
your bible has this statement right on the fucking cover.
but you miss that fact. all of you christians do. and most of you fail miserably in trying to deal with this fact.
@anarchyclayman King James had no part of the translation, he merelty sanctioned it. I think you should investigate the issue before making rash and emotional conjectures like you did here. Or would you rather not be confused with the facts?
Morality is subjective. Personally I live my life avoiding causing harm to others and trying to do things which benefit others. You dont need a god for that.
The bible is the last place you should go to for a healthy moral outlook.
@RationalConclusion If morality is subjective, would it be ok for a stranger to shoot you in the face right now? If not, why not? And why should that person care if morality is subjective?
@JesusIsUrSaviour it all depends on the exact circumstances. If I was attacking a stranger and the only way they could defend themselves was to turn my gun back on me and shoot me in the face I would not say that the stranger is doing something morally wrong.
The reason why morality is subjective is because it only exists within the mind. The reason why people should care is because ones actions can cause suffering to others.
@JesusIsUrSaviour because randomly shooting people in the face is a detriment to the species. are you really unable to figure out with your own common sense why it's a bad idea to kill people? people are social animals. they depend on each other for survival. not to mention, killing some one might make their family and friends wanna kill you back, which is also a rational reason not to kill people. it's pretty obvious why killing is a stupid, even without discussing morality.
@JesusIsUrSaviour because randomly shooting people in the face is a detriment to the species. are you really unable to figure out with your own common sense why it's a bad idea to kill people? people are social animals. they depend on each other for survival. not to mention, killing some one might make their family and friends wanna kill you back, which is also a rational reason not to kill people. it's pretty obvious why killing is stupid, even before discussing morality.
The concept of morality is based on opinion. In other words there is no "Right Answer"
It is the product of individuals with goals and a cooperative society which is willing to agree to protect those goals. For instance, most people don't want to be harmed so we agree to punish those who cause harm. We call this morality.
There is no reason to assume a God had any part of this.
Besides, cooperative civilizations are much older than the bible anyway, so you have no basis to make your claim.
How do you know what you think you know? You are assuming that the bible is accurate. How do you know that? What do you actually know about the bible? Based on this video, I'd say you know little of its history.
@PhyllisSophical You assume the Bible is inaccurate. My point is, does YOUR assumption lead to knowledge? The fact that you are looking for "truth" is a biblical presupposition.
@JesusIsUrSaviour Facts lead to the fact that the bible is inaccurate. Knowledge is all around if only one looks for it, instead of assuming that an ancient book written by fallible humans is truth and, therefore, one never looks any further.
@PhyllisSophical JIUS is repeating a far sneakier claim that that. He's claiming that since the Bible claims it is the source of knowledge and morality, anyone who uses knowledge and morality presupposes the BIble is true and is therefore self-defeating.
What a mess. You start out with presuppositionals, you conflate epistemic questions with moral ones, you misinterpet both atheism and evolution and at the end you just stick the bible into the story as a complete non-sequitur.
@Cafeeine I disagree. Could you explain the non-sequitur? I realize that there could be some doubling in the moral sense of "right." I mean to say that naturalism, atheism, evolution-ism does not have a basis for calling something "correct" or "true."
@JesusIsUrSaviour The Bible making a claim that it can lead to knowledge does not mean that that claim is true. Just because a shaman claims his raindance is the cause of rain, doesn't mean he's right.
Furthermore, you need to separate epistemic questions and moral questions. Naturalism, atheism or evolution are not moral systems, thats not their job.Methodological naturalism, science is the best way we have to make epistemic claims, to talk about what is.
@JesusIsUrSaviour We do have a basis for deciding what's right and wrong in society: experience and jurisprudence. If we'd stuck to the bible as a guide for moral authority. women and children would still be chattel and blacks would still be slaves.
So true; pork, shellfish, underwear, poly-cotton blends and abolition of slavery are all obviously immoral. The judeo-christian god, muderer of babies and punisher of the innocent is obviously the source of morality.
phookadude 5 months ago
more typical religious riddles and blabbing away! human chromosome 2 is not a fucking riddle there is nothing to presuppose here. it is what it is.
the hypocrisy is nearly killing me here. you say both parties are tyring to prove right and wrong and there is no right and wrong yet jesus is the way the truth and the light. you like most religious folks, liek to word smith everything, and create the rules for a conversation so that the atheist view is "self refuting". sorry buddy show facts!
Johnf85 7 months ago
My dear brother in Christ, you must quit wasting your time trying to prove that God exists. No one needs proof that he exists. His existance is axiomatic or self evident. When the Lord said "the fool says in his heart there is no god" the word fool means willingly ignorant. You already know that is the sinner's problem. However, you must also remember that he is blinded by his sin. Would you get angry with a blind man for tripping over what cannot see? The same applies to the sinner....
jehallhelo 7 months ago
No, sorry, the issue IS evidence..and religion offers none.
jerico641 9 months ago
@jerico641 No, the issue is your rebellious heart. The fact that you can make that statement proves that your hatred of God and his righteousness has made you "willingly ignorant" (2 Pet 3:5) of the abundance of prophetic, historic, scientific, and experiential evidence that Jesus Christ is Lord. But if there is no God, why should we care about evidence? How do you learn and persuade and reason with someone if we're all just chemical reactions in a blind, random struggle for life?
JesusIsUrSaviour 9 months ago
@JesusIsUrSaviour
Where is the evidence? The Bible is just as much evidence as the Rig Veda, the Epic of Gilgamesh or the Koran. What prophecies that are not vague, such as "there will be wars" came true? Which one came true outside the bible and how is it proof that jesus is god? Isreal, men made isreal, it just didn't appear out of the ground? Historic evidence? Jesus exists only in the bible some non canonical gospels and one line in jophesus? At least Muhammed is independently verified.
indiankingkong 8 months ago
@indiankingkong Here you betray your own ignorance of the Bible; e.g., the Bible gives the year, the tribe, even the city from which the Messiah would come. It spoke of how he was born, where he would be born, what time he would be born in vivid detail. There are at least 48 prophecies of his first coming, and more of his second. But look at your assumptions...why isn't the Bible a historical document? Because it disagrees with YOUR assumptions.
JesusIsUrSaviour 7 months ago
@indiankingkong Look how biased you are...there is plethora more evidence of Jesus Christ life, death, and resurrection: from fulfilled prophecy, archaeological confirmation, internal consistency of 40 authors from 1900 years across three continents...extrabiblical witnesses like Josephus (whom you discount), tacitus (whom you fail to mention)...
JesusIsUrSaviour 7 months ago
@JesusIsUrSaviour
As i said before, Aside from one sentence in Josephus, there isn't a shred off evidence that Jesus existed. If there is, prove it. Provide it.
There certainly isn't any archaeological evidence, if there was, it would be heralded as the greatest discovery of the modern age. There would be Nobel prizes. Etc.
indiankingkong 7 months ago
@indiankingkong Rather, you put the Koran...written by ONE man who suffered from either demon possession or some form of epilepsy...and claimed to have gotten the revelation from an angel (Gabriel). The Koran contradicts itself, plagiarizes sections of the Old Testament, and claims there is a swamp where the sun descends every day. But THAT is "independently verified?" By whom? Christ-rejecting heretics and rebels like yourself who want to exuse their own sin and ignore hell? Hardly..
JesusIsUrSaviour 7 months ago
@JesusIsUrSaviour
I said mohammed's own existence has been independently verified, outside of the Koran.
The bible makes plenty of contradictions too.
indiankingkong 7 months ago
@JesusIsUrSaviour
Where is the evidence? The Bible is just as much evidence as the Rig Veda, the Epic of Gilgamesh or the Koran. What prophecies that are not vague, such as "there will be wars" came true? Which one came true outside the bible and how is it proof that Jesus is god? Israel, men made Israel, it just didn't appear out of the ground? Historic evidence? Jesus exists only in the bible some non canonical gospels and one line in Josephus? At least Muhammad is independently verified.
indiankingkong 8 months ago
How do you know that it is the Christian god, and not, say, a Deist god?
Republica101 1 year ago
@Republica101 That's easy--His name is The Lord Jesus Christ. "And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory." (1 Tim 3:16)
JesusIsUrSaviour 1 year ago
@JesusIsUrSaviour you can't prove that. At all. The koran says the same about allah, and frankly, the deist god makes sense, while the christian god does not.
Republica101 1 year ago
@Republica101 Oh yes, I can. Here's one way--as a good empiricist, I have read the Bible and obeyed its command to repent and put my faith and trust in the risen Christ to save my soul. When I did that my life radically changed just as the Bible said it would. The Koran offers contradictions within itself, with the Bible, and with nature. I have read the Koran--it offers no hope of redemption through a risen Saviour, no assurance of forgiveness of sins.
JesusIsUrSaviour 1 year ago
@JesusIsUrSaviour You call that empiriscism? You assumed the Bible was true instantly! Of course your going to think your life changed, you wanted it to! What about the Gita? The Gita at least makes coherent sense. All three of the abrahamic religions worship a god who doesn't make any sense, and yes, the bible does have contradictions. YOU just wont take off your "Jesus-goggles" long enough to see them.
Republica101 1 year ago
@Republica101 Sorry, sir, but you're the one who is so stubborn in heart that now, you have to discredit my own testimony. Jesus Christ saved my soul and changed my life, and frankly, your bitter musings about are desperate attempts to try to explain away the truth. "There is no darkness , nor shadow of turning, where the workers of iniquity may hide themselves".
JesusIsUrSaviour 1 year ago
@JesusIsUrSaviour You know, if you converted to frickin scientology, you would have felt the EXACT same way about your life being changed, if we ignore the money thing.
Republica101 1 year ago
@Republica101 Wrong again.
JesusIsUrSaviour 1 year ago
@JesusIsUrSaviour And how would you know? Do you know anything about mainstream psychology? Apparently not.
Republica101 1 year ago
does the stupid hurt?
christinepeace 1 year ago
right and wrong is determined upon what is the best for the genetics of the species or on a smmaller note the for the individual. You would not go out an kill someone because someone might make offence to that and come back and get you thats y we have emotions aswell creating attachments to our lives. This whole premise fails DEBUNKED
WilkoPhilip 1 year ago
I dont understand how you get to your assumptions tho as you actually make a logical falicy. you state that the bible is a logical preposition because you can see it in your daily lives..... THAT IS WHAT SCIENCE IS U BUNGHOLE gtf off youtube
WilkoPhilip 1 year ago
@WilkoPhilip First, I am not sure what you are referring to here. Without Biblical presuppositions, I argue, knowledge would not be possible. That was my point. For example, you are trying to prove me wrong here--you assume there is a right answer and that using argument and logic you can persuade someone else to that correct answer. Which worldview supports this notion: Biblical or naturalistic? If we are matter and energy, what makes something correct or incorrect?
JesusIsUrSaviour 1 year ago
@WilkoPhilip Furthermore, I would contend that the "science" you cling to here would not be possible without the God of the Bible. To conduct scientific experiments, for example, you must ASSUME that the laws of chemistry, physics, nature, etc. are constant; i.e., the experiment you did on Tuesday, under the same conditions, should yield the same result on Wednesday. Which worldview supports that: the Biblical, in which God promised to uphold all things by the word of his power (Heb 1:3)
JesusIsUrSaviour 1 year ago
@WilkoPhilip including the natural laws and cycles (Gen 8:22). OR the naturalistic/evolutionary worldview where everything is in constant change by blind, natural processes? Which provides a rational basis for the uniformity we see in nature that makes knowledge possible? You can't have your cake and eat it too--you can't rely on biblical presuppositions to disprove the Bible. You only refute yourself.
JesusIsUrSaviour 1 year ago
i understand the way you look at the world but how do you know that the christian god is the right 1? i mean noahs flood would wipe out all plant life and all sea life leaving no food for when the land the boat/vessel aswell as the earth being 6000 years old (radieometric dating ((nort carbon dating))) basicaly how do you not know that muslims pray to the same god? or hundists? if he never comes and interacts with us phisicaly how do we know....?
WilkoPhilip 1 year ago
@WilkoPhilip You have a lot of questions here; let me pick up on the last one for now. God DID come and interact with us--physically incarnate as Jesus Christ--and in the written record of his word. God interacts with me every day. I know God personally. He saved and changed my life twelve years ago. Be the good empiricist you claim to be--I would challenge you (if you haven't) to read some Suras of the Koran against the gospel of John in the Bible. And SEE which one is from God...
JesusIsUrSaviour 1 year ago
@WilkoPhilip Granted, that is not the full answer to your question, but an honest starting point...Hindu texts, for one, never claim inspiration like the Bible. And the Koran contradicts itself, let alone the Biblical God it claims to come from.
JesusIsUrSaviour 1 year ago
@JesusIsUrSaviour simply right i do say islam hcontradicts itself and in the same context so does the bible i mean srsly islam has more scientific knowledge than the bible and the bible totaly says something like a bat is a bird when clearly not.
WilkoPhilip 1 year ago
so basically what you're trying to do is divert the debate to something that makes no sense and is completely irrelevant to theism (epistemology) so that it looks you are right. right and wrong are human concepts, and they're VERY subjective. therefore, this video is completely pointless because you're presupposing that right and wrong can only come from a god, your god specifically (I could invent millions of other possible gods with different definitions for right and wrong).
AshesWasHerName 1 year ago
I don't understand how you managed to record audio this strange... did you put a cheap microphone up to your phone? Did you record a clean source but compress it to the lowest possible quality? I DON'T UNDERSTAND!
MyOnlyFarph 1 year ago
If we assume that the bible is true, and that god exists, then it is still humans who decide whether something is good or not. God might claim that something is good, but it is up to people to decide whether to agree or dissagree with this claim.
Gods opinion would be no more valid then the opinion of the lowest sinner.
Jessymandias 1 year ago
@Jessymandias No, God's word is truth. If it is truth, then your refusal to agree with the truth would make you a liar or a rebel. Does gravity depend on your consent? No. This post-modern reasoning would preclude anyone from knowing anything if you follow your premise to its conclusion.
JesusIsUrSaviour 1 year ago
@JesusIsUrSaviour According to the bible I can have Jewish slaves. If it's the truth than I'm gonna go get one now. TTYL!
XemphasisontheeyesX 1 year ago
@JesusIsUrSaviour If the bible is truth, then slavery is a good and moral thing and you must kill all gays
camilocuesta 1 year ago
There is no atheist world view. Atheism is the lack of belief in a god or gods.
bigpchamber 1 year ago
ROFL! Have any evidence for any gods?
Right.
Debunked.
NotSoOldHippy 1 year ago 2
@NotSoOldHippy You are evidence of God.
JesusIsUrSaviour 1 year ago
I'm not sure what moral highground you suppose you are taking when you are referencing a book that condones slavery and genocide, not to mention the new testament message of how "faith and not works" gets you into heaven. When anyone believes that their god is on their side, nothing they do is wrong and everything they do is permissible.
MrRedDragon 1 year ago
@MrRedDragon First, the bible does not condone slavery or genocide. Second, the gospel is faith in the finished work of Jesus Christ, not easy-believism as you promote. Your argument is really just a straw man. I suggest you read the Bible if you have not.
JesusIsUrSaviour 1 year ago
@JesusIsUrSaviour I have been reading the bible and I did find that genocide and slavery are not only condoned but commanded by God. In the Old Testament, Moses leads God's people on a rampage through the middle east, wiping out just about every tribe they came into contact with (save for the few they merely occupied the lands of); killing every man, woman, and child, yet keeping the virgin girls for themselves as property.
MrRedDragon 1 year ago
@JesusIsUrSaviour Nowhere in the bible does it say anything disparaging about the practice of slavery, the only restriction being that worshipers of God should not be slaves. Accounts of slavery in the bible include slaves belonging to Abraham and his family, the slaves the Israelites took under Moses' leadership, and the many accounts in the letters by Paul and Peter state clearly that slaves should obey their masters with respect and fear. So I'm pretty sure the Bible condones slavery.
MrRedDragon 1 year ago
@JesusIsUrSaviour I know not every theist thinks that way about their god's opinion in them, but it's not too much of a stretch to say that if you are certain you are right, then you aren't thinking you are wrong in your actions.
MrRedDragon 1 year ago
The issue is not evidence? Evidence is ALWAYS required, and when empirical evidence goes against a "worldview" that set of assumptions must be changed or thrown out altogether (as in the case of creationism). I contend that mankind is the author of morality, and therefore, we are able to determine right from wrong. Even notions of "right" and "wrong" are human constructs themselves. Morality, is therefore, somewhat subjective. So.. talking snakes and virgin births are the "rational" foundation?
naejimba 1 year ago
@naejimba Why is evidence always required? Even that is a presupposition. See, you begin with beliefs even about how an argument should be conducted, what is rational, etc. If morality is subjective, then would it be ok for a stranger to shoot you right now? The talking snakes are figments of your imagination--do try to stay relevant and not sounding like a poor Dawkins-impersonation.
JesusIsUrSaviour 1 year ago
@JesusIsUrSaviour, it is not my beliefs on how an argument should be conducted, or what is rational, or even that evidence is always required.. but rather this is agreed upon by all of humanity except, apparently, you. In any other area, you require empirical evidence, why should religion be any different? Your example of someone shooting me is idiotic. You have no idea what subjective morality means. I might sound like a poor Dawkins impersonation, but you sound like a retard.
naejimba 1 year ago
How can you fail so hard? You make the presupposition of the existence of 'true' and 'right' then you read the bible came to the conclusion that it's 'true' (awesome mental gymnastics aside) and then use it to support your initial presupposition.
What do you think you've shown with this junkyard of an argument? It's hopelessly circular!
infinit888 1 year ago 10
@infinit888 Well, first, you beg the question in your comment. I think I have shown that the Bible is a reasonable and rational basis for truth. You, however, have made a meaningless diatribe. Please answer then, how does right and wrong comport with atheism? Why should there be a right answer in an atheist universe?
JesusIsUrSaviour 1 year ago
@JesusIsUrSaviour In which universe does pointing out that YOU are begging the question make ME beg the question?! Probably in the same universe your god exists huh.
No you haven't! To call the bible true (whatever rationalization you imply to make that statement) is to presuppose there is such a thing as 'truth' to begin with.
You are conflating descriptive statements (what is) with prescriptive statements (what ought to be) so I don't know what you want. Be specific.
infinit888 1 year ago
@infinit888 I want to point out your inconsistency. You come after me for presupposing there is such a thing as truth. In effect, you are accusing me of being wrong because there is no truth (as you say) while you make a statement that presupposes you are right and I am wrong. Do you see a problem here? If there is no truth, then what ground do you have to stand on to call me wrong? Your implicit cry for relativity is self-refuting.I suggest you repent and trust Christ as your Saviour.
JesusIsUrSaviour 1 year ago
@JesusIsUrSaviour I never said there is no 'truth' but as long as you don't define that therm and explain what you mean by it I won't come out and say it exists either.
I'm not presupposing you're wrong. I'm saying that based on logic, your (junkyard of an) argument is unsound. It does not follow.
If you don't care for logic and how it shows your argument is unsound be my guest but don't expect anyone to take you seriously.
infinit888 1 year ago
According to your god it's ok to stone unruly children and to sell your own daughter into slavery.
Magnius87 1 year ago
@Magnius87 Read the bible sir before you pull out Richard Dawkins' Top Ten Misunderstood Passages to Continue his Atheist Tantrum towards his Creator.
JesusIsUrSaviour 1 year ago
@JesusIsUrSaviour
Does God say it's "right" because it is
or
Is it "right" because God says so
If we are to presuppose a right and wrong I'd like to know which you think it is.
Oh, and, I always like the passage where God sent the she bear to kill the children for mocking the bald man.
paleosmoker 1 year ago
@JesusIsUrSaviour I happen to have read the bible, but please tell me how I have misunderstood Deuteronomy 21:18-21.
Magnius87 1 year ago
1611, king james writes his version of the bible. that was four hundred years ago, one thousand, five hundred and some odd years after the fact of the 'new testament'.
your bible has this statement right on the fucking cover.
but you miss that fact. all of you christians do. and most of you fail miserably in trying to deal with this fact.
anarchyclayman 1 year ago
@anarchyclayman King James had no part of the translation, he merelty sanctioned it. I think you should investigate the issue before making rash and emotional conjectures like you did here. Or would you rather not be confused with the facts?
JesusIsUrSaviour 1 year ago
@JesusIsUrSaviour willful ignorance is definitely a christian trait.
what the fuck do you think the word version means?
'irrational atheism'......... the use of words you do not understand is common amongst psychotics who believe that a dead man is a 'saviour'.
anarchyclayman 1 year ago
Morality is subjective. Personally I live my life avoiding causing harm to others and trying to do things which benefit others. You dont need a god for that.
The bible is the last place you should go to for a healthy moral outlook.
RationalConclusion 1 year ago
@RationalConclusion If morality is subjective, would it be ok for a stranger to shoot you in the face right now? If not, why not? And why should that person care if morality is subjective?
JesusIsUrSaviour 1 year ago
@JesusIsUrSaviour it all depends on the exact circumstances. If I was attacking a stranger and the only way they could defend themselves was to turn my gun back on me and shoot me in the face I would not say that the stranger is doing something morally wrong.
The reason why morality is subjective is because it only exists within the mind. The reason why people should care is because ones actions can cause suffering to others.
RationalConclusion 1 year ago
@JesusIsUrSaviour because randomly shooting people in the face is a detriment to the species. are you really unable to figure out with your own common sense why it's a bad idea to kill people? people are social animals. they depend on each other for survival. not to mention, killing some one might make their family and friends wanna kill you back, which is also a rational reason not to kill people. it's pretty obvious why killing is a stupid, even without discussing morality.
LesenderArbeiter 1 year ago 2
@JesusIsUrSaviour because randomly shooting people in the face is a detriment to the species. are you really unable to figure out with your own common sense why it's a bad idea to kill people? people are social animals. they depend on each other for survival. not to mention, killing some one might make their family and friends wanna kill you back, which is also a rational reason not to kill people. it's pretty obvious why killing is stupid, even before discussing morality.
LesenderArbeiter 1 year ago
@JesusIsUrSaviour I ate shrimp for dinner..... Oh No! I'm an immoral heathen!
Zen8804 1 year ago
The concept of morality is based on opinion. In other words there is no "Right Answer"
It is the product of individuals with goals and a cooperative society which is willing to agree to protect those goals. For instance, most people don't want to be harmed so we agree to punish those who cause harm. We call this morality.
There is no reason to assume a God had any part of this.
Besides, cooperative civilizations are much older than the bible anyway, so you have no basis to make your claim.
joshkarandora 1 year ago
How do you know what you think you know? You are assuming that the bible is accurate. How do you know that? What do you actually know about the bible? Based on this video, I'd say you know little of its history.
PhyllisSophical 1 year ago 3
@PhyllisSophical You assume the Bible is inaccurate. My point is, does YOUR assumption lead to knowledge? The fact that you are looking for "truth" is a biblical presupposition.
JesusIsUrSaviour 1 year ago
@JesusIsUrSaviour Facts lead to the fact that the bible is inaccurate. Knowledge is all around if only one looks for it, instead of assuming that an ancient book written by fallible humans is truth and, therefore, one never looks any further.
PhyllisSophical 1 year ago
@PhyllisSophical JIUS is repeating a far sneakier claim that that. He's claiming that since the Bible claims it is the source of knowledge and morality, anyone who uses knowledge and morality presupposes the BIble is true and is therefore self-defeating.
Cafeeine 1 year ago
@JesusIsUrSaviour "The fact that you are looking for "truth" is a biblical presupposition."
Im sorry your claiming that the concept of truth was first presupposed by the bible so that make it true?
That would be both false and an invalid conclusion.
gusb232 1 year ago
@JesusIsUrSaviour That's silly. The ancient greeks were searching for truth too, and they weren't christians.
Telamnar 1 year ago 2
What a mess. You start out with presuppositionals, you conflate epistemic questions with moral ones, you misinterpet both atheism and evolution and at the end you just stick the bible into the story as a complete non-sequitur.
Better read some more logic textbooks.
Cafeeine 1 year ago 20
@Cafeeine I disagree. Could you explain the non-sequitur? I realize that there could be some doubling in the moral sense of "right." I mean to say that naturalism, atheism, evolution-ism does not have a basis for calling something "correct" or "true."
JesusIsUrSaviour 1 year ago
@JesusIsUrSaviour The Bible making a claim that it can lead to knowledge does not mean that that claim is true. Just because a shaman claims his raindance is the cause of rain, doesn't mean he's right.
Furthermore, you need to separate epistemic questions and moral questions. Naturalism, atheism or evolution are not moral systems, thats not their job.Methodological naturalism, science is the best way we have to make epistemic claims, to talk about what is.
Cafeeine 1 year ago
@JesusIsUrSaviour We do have a basis for deciding what's right and wrong in society: experience and jurisprudence. If we'd stuck to the bible as a guide for moral authority. women and children would still be chattel and blacks would still be slaves.
Gwaithmir 1 year ago