This is so comical! Typical Athiestic approach...So you don't believe in God the father God the son and God the Holy Spirit, what a shame! Maybe you may change your mind real soon as your ignorance is damned!
@F1NGER Why do you feel threatened? It's not intended to make you feel like necking yourself or anything like that just saying we live in a big world and what information or evidence that your looking for you may not find it, maybe try approaching it in a different way? think without the Atheistic mentality....Look at whats around you and be honest with yourself, I can only say and if you don't agree then that's ok!
haha real atheists huh thats why they know books from the bible all atheists please open ur eyes and if you actually watch this show all i see is a whole bunch of christians making them studder
@baseballbro1000 I think the atheists here take the scientific method approach, taking all evidence into consideration to form a conclusion that can evolve .. thats why they read the bible as well....and Its "Stutter", btw..
You can't change anyones beliefs without a mind control machine.. you can keep presenting logical and reasoned arguments but there's evidence billions of people could care less about logic and reason. We need to come to common grounds that we can't simply can't create public policy and governance on beliefs and faith
@BluntVerbally23 re-read my comment. until you have a magic logic wand to make everyone think reasonably then people will believe in god.. I said we have to common grounds about public policy so that it remains a private belief, just as we can't base policy on unicorns
I hear the argument made by atheists that Jesus did not exist during the time the bible says and in all fairness they are correct.A man named Jesus did not exist around the time the bible gospels depict.This is because Jesus is not the actual name of the Christ. His original name was Yeshua and he was not called Jesus until the bible was translated out of its original Hebrew and Greek into European Languages such as German and English.
It's funny, but when "christians" like Strobel and Cameron say that they used to atheists they expect everybody to just accept that, but when Atheists like myself, (and I believe this applies to most atheists) say that they used Christians, we are told quite categorically that we never were christians.
This is typical of the double standards of christians.
Not only was I a very strong Christian, but it was through thoroughly reading the bible than I became an atheist.
@HonestMan395 agreed. either told we weren't christians at all or not very "strong" ones.
but when they tell me they were once atheist for a part of my llife, i say that they must've not thought about it hard enough, i'm suddenly the one making judgments and personal attacks...
@Vroom246 I don't know the statistics, or even if anyone has taken any, but from my own experience, I would expect the christians who've become atheists outnumber atheists who've become christians by a very large factor.
In nearly 70 years of life, I've only ever met a handful of the latter, but many of the former.
@HonestMan395 I was reading some of your comments and you touched on how the nativity never happened. Is this due to the gap between when Herod died and, when Publius Sulpicius Quirinius was appointed to office in Syria and the Taxation or Census that followed? The gap is something like 10-12 years between the "historical" events in Matthew 2 and Luke 2.
@CtheWolfe That's the one. Even the Catholic Encyclopaedia says that it is something that is hard to reconcile. but it also includes the slaughter of the innocents which also has no evidence to support it.
I've had a few varying reasons given to me, but none of them have stood up to close examination.
@HonestMan395 Ah yeah I have looked into that one to. Herod's slaughter of the Rabbi's was well recorded; but no mention of the children at all. Also if you take this into account Jesus must have been 1-2 before Herod died even. I find it unlikely that Herod gave this order and died immediately as well. So that puts further strain on an already large gap in the years between the historical events of the gospels.
@CtheWolfe There's also an interesting aspect of the census story. The one that Quirinius was ordered to hold was only for Judea. As Nazareth was not in Judea, Neither joseph nor Mary would have been required to attend. Further more. Roman Census's were, in any case, conducted very much as they are today and everyone was counted where they lived. Nobody was expected to travel.
The whole nativity story is a myth made up by the early church to fit the supposed old testament prophesies.
@HonestMan395 And does a very poor job of it too. I find it amusing when I read apologists trying to rationalize these points. I have heard it was one of the sons of Herod(neither of which were king). Or that Quirinius held office in Syria before(but he never)... or that he was governing in some capacity.... in which case why not name the actual governor of Syria? Its all rather silly attempts to bend truth.
@CtheWolfe It's not just the New Testament. I've been studying the bible and biblical history for over 50 yrs. What we have found out about Ancient Egyptian and Jewish history. It turns out that nearly all the major stories in the Old testament are just that, stories, with no basis in fact.
@HonestMan395 Have you read "The Case Against the Case for Christ" by Robert M. Price. I had been considering picking that book up. Just wondering if you have any insight on it.
Not that you atheists would know the difference, but the roman catholic church throughout the ages has been hiding behind christianity. God is not in the vatican. The RCC are the true heretics. And they only killed those who challenged the RCC's teachings, they did not execute people of other religions, least of all- atheists. Do your homework. Look up the Reformation.
Not one atheist was ever burned at the stakes. The only people burned at the stakes were Christ's true followers who held that the sacrifice in the communion was symbolic, not a magic priest or popes power to piss in the wind and magically transform the wine and wafer... these people were practicing christians who were labeled as "heretics" for defying the doctrines of the filthy roman catholic church.
That's a bold claim and just the sort of baseless nonsense I'd expect from a theist. Go on, go ahead and cite your source(s) of this nugget of bunk.
Do you want to know how I can be certain that your are wrong and dishonest?
Because of the tens of thousands of people murdered by your religion(s) you have not spoken to a single one, with regards to their personal system of belief. You are merely asserting a religious belief onto them.
500 eyewitness accounts of people who saw jesus alive after his ressurection. Among them were some that denied him befire his death. They are also the ones that testified of him after he was ressurected. They were persecuted, tortured and killed for their testimonies. If christ was not raised from the dead these men would never have been heard from again. Many christ believers have been killed for their testimony. Not ONE atheist ever died for atheism. Atheism is not a worthy cause.
I'd be willing to bet atheists have died for atheism, afterall Christians historically haven't always been kind to non believers. I dare you to say no atheist ever got burned alive by a christian believer. Atheism is the freedom not to believe in God. That is as worthy a cause as freedom itself.
@jct09100 Atheism is not a cause, it is simply the lack of a belief due to lack of evidence. As for the 500 eyewitness accounts - they don't exist. There is no documented evidence of Jesus' resurrection, so how can you claim there are 500 accounts? We keep hearing about muhammad - do you believe that the Koran is the word of god?
This insecure atheist piece of shit can't have an intelligent conversation. He thinks he defeats his opponents by being rude, raising his voice and cutting them off.
@ttone2379 From what I can see, it's the callers who are trying to prove the existence of god. All Matt Dillahunty & Tracie Harris are doing is pointing out the blatent errors in the callers arguments.
LOL, this prove that atheist aren't any more enlightened than other. former atheist now christian. what made him atheist in the first place, freethinking??? what made him christian now, freethinking?? your pick....me I am just ROFLMAO
I don't understand how these people can believe three thousand year old writings of olden philosophers like Aristotle and Plato and then not believe an account of Josephus or Tacitus, just because they lived after Jesus.
Jesus' timeline and chain of events was so major, that if it WAS true, people definitely would have been talking about it often, and in detail. Especially those who've witnessed miracles. By that way of thinking even an account 100 years after could be viable.
@KeusFrench Would you mind showing the world ONE piece of irrefutable evidence for the salvation story... Certainly of such an earthshattering event there must be some evidence . The salbvation story doesn`t even make sense. Even Scriptures admit it. For the cross is nonsense to those who perish(non-believers) but to us ...
@KeusFrench Continued>> This god upstairs is really funny. One day he decides to redeem mankind, to atone for all their trangressions aginst his commendments. He decides to die for them, He chooses a people, and makes sure that they know that he is comming(prophecies) But they must not recognise him, otherwise they will not kill him. So he makes the prophecies very murky. His plot works. I admit this scenario is divine. ???
@KeusFrench Because Tacitus didn't claim that Jesus existed, but rather wrote down a story he heard with a bunch of other stories he heard. Josephus' one writing on Jesus was shown to be a forgery. Also, are you not aware that only the gullible accept that everything attributed to Aristotle and Plato is actually by them? There are some writings we can show reasonably well enough to believe they were written by the same person, and therefore attribute a name. Not the same thing.
@KeusFrench If Jesus "Timeline and chain of events was so major "as you call it, why is it that during his lifetime, nobody wrote anything about him.
If there really was someone who made as big a splash as Jesus is supposed to have made; speaking to massive crowds, healing the sick, raising the dead, walking on water, etc.
Surely that must have created some interest in what was, a highly controlled and regulated police state. Yet no writer of the time even mentions him in passing.
@HonestMan395 I don't know why. Perhaps they did and we just haven't found their documents as of yet. The apostles were far too busy following Jesus to have the time, which is why some wrote after His death. They have viable accounts of Jesus' actions.
@KeusFrench When I said that nobody wrote about him during his life. I was meaning any of the 40 or so writers and chroniclers who were alive during that time.
As for the apostles. No-one nknows who wote the gospels, but most scholars now agree that they were not written by the apostles. In fact the gospels were anonymous and were not given names until around the 3rd century CE.
One thin is clear though, nothing was written about Jesus by anyone who actually met him.
@KeusFrench It makes the claims suspect. All we know about Jesus comes from the New Testament and writings derived from the it. There is no truly independent source of information.
It'd be the same as someone writing stories based on the old Ancient Greek or Norse legends and expecting them to be accepted as truth.
Without independent verification, they're just hearsay and as such can't be accepted as fact without proof, Especially as the N.T. itself disproves it's own stories.
@HonestMan395 Okay, well how does the N.T. disprove it's own theories? You can't just make that claim without a basis...
And I can see where you are coming from. But how then can we trust writings on Aristotle? Or Socrates? Those are even more ancient texts. How can we be so SURE of those but not of the Bible?
I guarantee you, if the Bible did not talk about Jesus being "God", or divine, and it just gave historical accounts from the NT, then people would be more apt to believe it.
Well, your right. If Socrates had continually wrote of supernatural events, we'd have to question his writings. Besides which, I don't think anybody is 'SURE' of the absolute validity of ANY ancient text. It would be like someone thousands of years from now finding stories of UFO abductions and claiming it's fact because someone wrote it down.
You mean, if you took out all the unprovable magic tricks? Yup, you're right there. Except that without corroborating evidence it would still be taken with a grain of salt.
@DaToNyOyO By "unprovable magic tricks", you must mean Jesus' divinity, which I already took out in my example. So thank you for restating my argument, dimwit.
@KeusFrench 1/1. Regarding Aristotle and Socrates. This is an old Christian strawman argument.
I think that Staunts has put it as well as I could in his last comment after yours. I would only add that other contemporary writers also corroborated both Socrates and Aristotle and the subjects they talked about at the time. There are no independent corroborating sources for the bible.
As for your idea of the bible being believed if it was just a history book. I beg to differ. Cont'd.
@KeusFrench 2/2. Even as a history book it is widely inaccurate and unlike the Greek philosophers, it has very few corroborating sources other than itself and they only confirm the existence of certain places and people.
Most of the cornerstone events, such as Genesis, The Exodus, The Great kingdom of David, etc. are just legends and have no verification other than the bible.
Even the bible itself confirms that the nativity never happened. Cont'd.
@KeusFrench 3/3. As for the life and miracles of Jesus, (which, by the way, all predate Jesus,) including the crucifixion and the resurrection have no verification in any contemporary writings other than the bible itself and Writings derived from the bible.
There were over 40 writers and chroniclers around during his lifetime, but not one mentions him even in passing.
Don’t you find that strange, considering all the amazing things he is supposed to have done?
@HonestMan395 They have no other source because there is only ONE source. The Bible is the specific text for Christ, as is the Qu'ran for Islam.
And I am confused for your 2nd section on your 3rd post - 40 writers during Jesus' lifetime? Whom?
And also, there are tons of scholars and historians who find the Bible to be true and they can historically prove it. Yet there also people who claim to do the opposite.
To be honest, I don't think either side will ever give up or submit.
Are there any Christians at all in this world with the courage to say "biblical tenets and those of my faith MIGHT be true therefore I will believe them in the hope they are true."
Show me a Christian with this much blatant, magnificent honesty and I will kiss and hug the SOB. If they could only step back and see just how intellectually and grossly dishonest they are being when they positively assert their belief system has its origins in the supernatural.
"I am an EX ATHEIST...." ...mouahahahahahahahahahahahaha..... when exactly where you an ATHEIST, when you were born and you were not corrupted YET by indoctrination of the Church and the MORONIC people who think they know GOD.
If the NT can be disregarded because of gaps between the originals and earliest copies, then we must also disregard the writings of Homer, Herodotus, Socrates, Plato and Aristotle. These authors' works have several hundred year gaps between the originals and earliest copies whereas with the NT it is only a hundred years at the most. Why not doubt Aristotle, whose works have a 1400 year gap between the date written and earliest copies? Why believe Socrates at all?
@ShiftyWeasel Homer and other authors never claimed to be divinely inspired, so your argument makes no sense. Besides, I am not talking about God but about authentic authorship. If someone claims the gospels weren't really MMLJ's testimonies because they may have been penned by someone else (a friend or disciple of MMLJ most likely), then using the same logic Socrates' philosophies were not really Socrates since they were actually written by Plato.
@BachScholar I wasn't making an argument. I was pointing out the irrelevancy of yours--namely, that comparing the works of various Greek authors to the gospel accounts in the NT doesn't mean anything. You started off with "If the NT can be disregarded because of gaps..." even though nobody is discounting it. No one (here) discounts the existence of Jesus, or that he was a prophet of some renown. They dispute the holding up of the gospels as evidence for Jesus' divinity/existence of God.
@BachScholar You also said, "Why not doubt Aristotle" and "Why believe Socrates at all". Those are meaningless statements. Doubt Aristotle about what? Not believe Socrates about what? I know what you were TRYING to say, but your argument was cobbled together rather poorly.
Who "believes" Socrates now? It not the point of his writing. Homer, Herodotus, Socrates, Plato and Aristotle didn't write dogma. They were open minded philosophers that tried to find out how the world works. Also, our world today is very different, and we know more than the philosophers. They didn't squeeze their round world into a square box like religious dogma does.
anyway you're basically comparing apples and oranges.
I also don't believe in evolution. If evolution is based on mutations, which are always random (scientific fact), then why are these mutations in evolution supposively always positive. Also, if we supposively came from "early humans" (australopithecus, homo erectus, etc), who came from monkeys/gorillas, then why did these early humans die out while the monkeys/gorillas are still alive when the mutations in evolution are "positive mutations." There are many gaps in evolution that people don't see
@LiamK26 They aren't always positive. The thing is that negative mutations reduce chances of survival, so if someone/thing has a negative mutation their chances of surviving long enough to pass is on through mating, or even being chosen as a mate are significantly reduced. For example a deer with a mutation that gives it a hyper fast metabolism will need more food, and probably die of starvation before it can mate, or it will look too sickly and thin for any other deer to choose it as a mate
@titans091052 Exactly. In fact, I've never heard of a mutation that was positive. For example: there are people who have the mutation of being immune to malaria. However, anybody who possesses the mutation of being immune to malaria also has sickle cell anemia.
@LiamK26 If you don't want to be called an idiot, don't act like one.
It would be difficult to explain evolution by natural selection to you because you obviously don't even have the knowledge of a year seven school student when it comes to the subject and, I suspect, you have no intention of gaining such knowledge. That would upset your fairy stories of creation.
On that basis, I have no intention of wasting my time on someone who displays such wilful ignorance with such pride.
If this all happened by chance, then why haven't we found any other trace of life in the universe? If you ever learn about biology, you would realize how complicated the human body is. There is also no other creature in the world or in the universe that has the mind of a human, one that has free will - the freedom to make your own choice. Wake up guys, the answer is right there in front of you.
@LiamK26 You are wrong on so many level's. We haven't 'found' any extraterestrial life because we do not have the mean's to travel to any of the other zillion galaxies in our lifetime, and to know that there are zillions of other galaxies that we have no idea about while assuming we are the only life froms is really, really egocentric. There are 'traces' of life in our very own galaxy, btw.
There are no other creatures yet.. and you can thank evolution for that, but free will is an illusion.
@IndubitablyMe1988 Hi :) It's possible there is life on other planets. It's hard to believe that God the creator of this vast & beautiful universe didn't put intelligent life on other planets. Our animals are smart & learn, but they don't have a spirit. They have a soul & body. What makes us unique is God created us in His image. He breathed His spirit into us. Were were made for the Lords enjoyment, because he wants a relationship with us. The same way we enjoy being with ppl we love.
@robiwil2 That sound's really beautiful and all, but there is no evidence for that at all. Why we're there no mention's of other planet's and universe's in the Bible? God should have had some knowledge to bestow on his disciples with concern to the universe. The Bible is actually written quit the opposite, with emphasis on geocentric theory. That the Earth so important that God created life only on this planet, in his image. You can't say now, in hindsight, that "oh there may be extraterestrial
@SeedsOfHatred Thank you so much for pointing out a YouTube spelling error. Much appreciated... but how do you have the time to read through endless amounts of YouTube posts, just to try and one-up people, not on substance, but on misspelled words, and still have enough time to scult those sweet abs, bruh? That's pretty impressive. I bet the chick's are all up on that, amirite?
robiwil2: This show is proof positive there IS NO GOD (or at least none worth worshipping). Not a single person has called in to defend Yahweh to any one's satisfaction. Matt and his gang always win the argument, or at least tie. You need to actually think about what is being said, and not act like a 4 year old child defending Santa Claus only so you will get a gift at xmas. You can't give up the idea of God anymore than a child and Santa : for the same reasons - the gift.
They never let the callers defend themselves. They always interrupt the callers, therefore of course they are going to win the argument.
So IN MY OPINION, Alan won this argument, without even having to defend himself. Matt, learn to bite your tongue once in awhile. It doesn't matter how much knowledge of something you have, because as soon as you turn into a dick, you lose your credibility.
Oh wow! Someone who finally stands up for themselves against Matt's semantic bullshit. Matt has more denial than any Christian could possibly have. I may not believe in the Christian god, I may not believe in ANY god, but I do understand when someone is being an ass hole.
Alan hung up because he didn't like being interrupted constantly. I swear, these show hosts are going to CONVERT ME TO CHRISTIANITY, just because their constant interruptions and flat out bullshit. Just let the caller talk.
"Hahahahaha....LOL....ROFL...Ha¬hahahaha, you are a joke! Go now and take a shower, lose some weight, and learn to speak better! This is the only way you can become a sister wife"
eag11e
This is how an antimormon speaks and he says J.S was a con man and he is in Christ
@nosuchthing8 the only ppl who wrote about Jesus were not only ppl who believed in Him...if you look into history the Pharisees are the ones who recorded all the miracles Jesus did...they did not believe in Him and they turned him over the the romans to be crucified. Can we please turn that jungle music off so we can really hear the conversation lol
MRG: No one outside the believers bothered to write about Jesus. That is the problem. Remember that Jesus healed thousands of people, conjured up the loaves and fishes for some other thousands, there were all those earthquakes and such when he died. But no one outside the faith ever bothered to jot this down. WMDs, UFOs, big foot could be real. What persuades people is evidence however.
Uberlaser: I think the whole point of the show went over your head. Anyone can write something down. The point is that not a single person (outside the bible) that could have actually met Jesus bothered to write about it, as far as we know. Josephus was born after Jesus died. It appears to be what it is - a legend grew up (about a real person or not) and when the legend had enough followers, someone wrote it down. Lack of evidence = WMDs, bigfoot, loch ness monster, UFOs. Get the point?
If deists are honest with themselves, they have to explain why every single deist has been demolished by this show. I mean, if Yahweh is real, he must be the lamest deity to ever exist. Yahweh is supposed to be the most powerful and most inteligent creature in the entire universe. Yet Yahweh can't get any of his millions of followers to defeat the logic on this show. Even if Yahweh does exist, this show proves that Yahweh is not worthy of our worship.
There is absolutely no way any mear man could have survived being beatin beyond recognition, whipped to where his bones were showing & nailed to a cross(tree) & stabbed in the side with His heart pierced, put into a cold tomb with no medical treatment for 3 days & then just came out like nothing happened, & in the middle of all this he asked God to forgive them...would u b so forgiving if this happened 2 someone u loved. Thats what God did 4 us. If thats not worthy of praise I don't know what is
@RaptorRule77 thats because the majority of them are. if someone tries to question them about their beliefs, they freak the fug out and run away. The majority of christians ARE ignorant. I don't mean that in the way people mostly use it, as in they're rude. I mean that in the literal meaning that they do not know, because all they know is the words their church tells them and refuse to listen to anything else.
Hi @KristoferLloyd...I'm not ignorant...nor do I run away...this is not about a religion it is about a relationship with our Lord & Savior...it is a free gift that we want to share with the world...the gift of joy, peace, love & eternal life...we are held hostage and a ransom is demanded for our life...Jesus paid that ransom so we can be free. We don't earn Gods grace it is freely given :)
@KristoferLloyd I know u didn't mean me personally...I just used the I sense of the word because ppl get so offended sometime...I know what u meant :) Happy New Year!
When it comes down to it. Christianity, Judaism, and even Islam (a large chunk of the qur'an is copied almost directly from the Old testament.) rely on a book (the bible) which was written from the word of mouth, handed down myths and legends of superstitious goat herders and which even from a purely historical aspect bear little resemblance to what we know actually happened in those times.
This is even before we add in all the supposed miracles, which are copied from many other older religions.
@HonestMan395 the Bible was not written by goat herders. It was written over a period of 2000 yrs by Kings, physicians, tax collector, fishermen, farmers, singer & shepherds The marvel is that a library so perfectly cohesive could have been produced by such a diverse crowd over a period of time which stagers the imagination. Jesus is it's grand subject, designed for our good and the glory of God is it's end
@robiwil2 Actually, nothing in the bible was written down at all until about 600BCE, during the babylonian exile.
Until then, What we call the Old Testament, was just a collection of folk tales, myths and legends that had been passed down by word of mouth and embellished for hundreds of years. It was then added to, subtracted from, edited and just plain invented until about 400CE, when it settled into the bible, more or less as we have it today, with the New Testament tagged on.
@HonestMan395 What I said was it was written over a period of 2000 yrs. Actually the 1st laws of God were written by Gods own hand Moses broke those when the Israelites were worshipping an idol when he came down the mountain..Moses went back up the mountain to receive the 10 commandments written on stone. God also had Arron write on his staff. These were the beginnings of Torah. Moses lived 1300 yrs before the babylonian captivity.
@robiwil2 Where did you get this information from?
No doubt, from the bible or some writing derived from the bible. Sorry, but you can't use the bible to prove itself.
There is no evidence, outside of the bible that Moses ever existed and there is evidence which makes it unlikely that the Exodus, and therefore the giving of the of the 10 Commandments, ever happened, because The Israelites were never in Egypt in the first place. The whole story is just a myth.
@HonestMan395 Well that's not quite true. Most sholars would agree that there was a small exodus of a mixed group of people who left Egypt which eventualy became Israel. This story of beginnings was mythologised into the acounts that we have now. This doesn't mean the Biblical acount is literaly true it just gives some explanation of it's origins.
@gextvedde 1/3. Yes, I agree that there is some evidence that a small group of people of Canaanite descent left Egypt and eventually joined the tribes of what was to become the Israelites, in Canaan, where they had always been. They, no doubt, brought with them stories of their “escape”, which were improved upon by each successive generation.
However, there is no extra-biblical evidence of anything close to being the huge exodus of slaves that the bible describes. Cont'd.
@gextvedde 2/3. Also, other than the bible, there is no evidence of Moses, or even that huge army of slaves built the great building works.
Although Egypt of the time had some slaves, mostly domestic, it was not a slave economy. The Egyptians themselves, through a form of National service, did all the great monumental building works. They were very well treated with free health care, good housing and good food. They served for a fixed term, then went back to their families. Cont'd.
@gextvedde 3/3. Another reason to doubt the exodus.
Throughout that whole period, Canaan was a garrisoned outpost of the Egyptian empire, which extended up to the Hittite southern border, so why would they go there to escape Egypt?
You have to remember, these stories were passed by word of mouth for hundreds of years before they were ever written down. That didn't happen until the Israelites were exiled in Babylon, so the stories could have been morale boosters for a defeated people.
@HonestMan395 Yep I pretty much agree with everything you've said. I just think we have to be careful not to slide into saying "it's all bollocks" when the scholarship doesn't demand that. Of course even if we can show that there was an exodus of people I by no means proves the truth of Judaism or Christianity or that there is a God.
@gextvedde The thing is, the exodus and all that flowed from it, i.e. Moses and the Ten Commandments are the cornerstones of the Judeo/Christian religions. If the Exodus never happened then the whole edifice, if not destroyed, at least comes into serious question.
I've had christians justify their faith with, what I think is a real cop-out:
"The bible doesn't matter, because I've received the touch of Jesus."
If the bible isn't true, then god is no more true than Zeus or Wotan.
something can exist even it's not readily verifiable. The world was round even when the evidence available at the time suggested it was flat. Lack of evidence is not evidence of nonexistence.
@tkdtap satan knows more about the bible than us so its not impossible for this guy satan use this guy to discredit God like how did he deceive some of the angels
@tkdtap what i said is satan knows the bible from front to back dats why its not impossinble for this guy to know the bible and satan used this guy to dicredit God
What if the devil actually wrote all the holy scriptures to lure mankind away from god. When looking at all the misery that has followed organized religion, it would not be such a far fetched thing to think :)
@jpindseth why would you think the devil wrote the scripture when Jesus was tempted by the devil Jesus used whats written in the scripture to refute satan
@SuperMamba78 Think bigger. What if everything about all religions was made up by the devil, including Jesus, revelations, scriptures, etc. And if you say that it is not in the devils power, then what if he lied about that too.
You can not disprove my theory any more than I can disprove any religion or the existence of god.
@jpindseth OF COURSE NO-ONE can disprove the existence of God, in Philosophy, that's a falllacy. But if you have such theory, then you HAVE to prove it, because to claim existence of something requires something ALL religions fail to provide: THE BURDEN OF THE PROOF.
@sentidocomunve And this is the problem. It is impossible to prove/disprove "my theory" just like it is impossible to prove/disprove any other religion. They all fail if the burden of proof falls on them.
(also God if only relevant if he is personal. So discussing the existence of god does not seem that important to me. Rather discuss if god (if he/it exist) is personal or not)
Basing your life on any religion is just as strange as basing your life on my theory.
@jpindseth Hahah I love using that one on theists. Sometimes I'll go one step further and ask how they know god didn't lose the war with Satan and he has just been fucking with us all this time. :)
@jpindseth actually the original idea of an anti-christ is an early christian idea of that the accuser (using the orthodox jewish idea of enemy) would change the bible from what christ said to stray people from christ an god and use people like the catholics or protestants(just an example) to manipulate the scriptures so it would be anti christ so your not to off base mate
Most scholars give more wieght to the internal evidence the Matthew and John wrote the gospels called by their names, than to an autographed copy. For the autograph couldve been forged. But the internal evidence of authorship is more subtle and gives rise to Jesus' teaching of non-exaltation of a man and his works.
Jesus often told his followers not to spread word of his miracles.
The people who saw Jesus wrote about Jesus story. John and Matthew are written by eye witness, in person accounts. John is by John the Apostle and leave little doubt who wrote the book of John. John wrote this about 70 years after Jesus death and Yes, John was a contemporary of Jesus and an eye witness. Just because he wrote it 70 years latter does not make in "not contemporary" . John is the best since it is an eye witness and one of the 12 selected men that Jesus lived with for 3 years.
haha told! people there is no...yes we repeat no contemporary accounts!! done finished. How many times do historians, scholars have to go over this??!!
@Marzattacz So get off your high horse on this. John and Matthew are both eye witnesses and contemporary accounts of Jesus. If I write about Bill Clinton today, I am an eye witness and a contemporary account. Just because the events are 20 years old does not make them less valid, I am giving a full, and accurate account of Bill's life even though I did not write it down for 20 years. Late does not mean "invalid" in mean later and still very good reliable history. don't be so foolish.
This is so comical! Typical Athiestic approach...So you don't believe in God the father God the son and God the Holy Spirit, what a shame! Maybe you may change your mind real soon as your ignorance is damned!
alpha2470 12 hours ago
@alpha2470 Protip: Threatening people with things they don't believe in isn't very effective.
F1NGER 6 hours ago
@F1NGER Why do you feel threatened? It's not intended to make you feel like necking yourself or anything like that just saying we live in a big world and what information or evidence that your looking for you may not find it, maybe try approaching it in a different way? think without the Atheistic mentality....Look at whats around you and be honest with yourself, I can only say and if you don't agree then that's ok!
alpha2470 1 hour ago
haha real atheists huh thats why they know books from the bible all atheists please open ur eyes and if you actually watch this show all i see is a whole bunch of christians making them studder
baseballbro1000 19 hours ago
@baseballbro1000 I think the atheists here take the scientific method approach, taking all evidence into consideration to form a conclusion that can evolve .. thats why they read the bible as well....and Its "Stutter", btw..
elchicho25 13 hours ago
You can't change anyones beliefs without a mind control machine.. you can keep presenting logical and reasoned arguments but there's evidence billions of people could care less about logic and reason. We need to come to common grounds that we can't simply can't create public policy and governance on beliefs and faith
dopeasfuckk 2 days ago
@dopeasfuckk * didn't mean to say can't twice
dopeasfuckk 2 days ago
@dopeasfuckk nope no common ground they are wrong and we will not submit to a world of nonsense, freedom from the tyranny of this god myth!
BluntVerbally23 1 day ago
@BluntVerbally23 re-read my comment. until you have a magic logic wand to make everyone think reasonably then people will believe in god.. I said we have to common grounds about public policy so that it remains a private belief, just as we can't base policy on unicorns
dopeasfuckk 1 day ago
I hear the argument made by atheists that Jesus did not exist during the time the bible says and in all fairness they are correct.A man named Jesus did not exist around the time the bible gospels depict.This is because Jesus is not the actual name of the Christ. His original name was Yeshua and he was not called Jesus until the bible was translated out of its original Hebrew and Greek into European Languages such as German and English.
TheBunnygirl20 2 days ago
@TheBunnygirl20 pretty much everyone who knows anything about the subject knows this. Their argument still stands.
soronery1 1 day ago
thumbs up if you read the Urantia Papers
Jboone31190 3 days ago
It's funny, but when "christians" like Strobel and Cameron say that they used to atheists they expect everybody to just accept that, but when Atheists like myself, (and I believe this applies to most atheists) say that they used Christians, we are told quite categorically that we never were christians.
This is typical of the double standards of christians.
Not only was I a very strong Christian, but it was through thoroughly reading the bible than I became an atheist.
HonestMan395 3 days ago
@HonestMan395 agreed. either told we weren't christians at all or not very "strong" ones.
but when they tell me they were once atheist for a part of my llife, i say that they must've not thought about it hard enough, i'm suddenly the one making judgments and personal attacks...
Vroom246 3 days ago
@Vroom246 I don't know the statistics, or even if anyone has taken any, but from my own experience, I would expect the christians who've become atheists outnumber atheists who've become christians by a very large factor.
In nearly 70 years of life, I've only ever met a handful of the latter, but many of the former.
HonestMan395 2 days ago
@HonestMan395 I was reading some of your comments and you touched on how the nativity never happened. Is this due to the gap between when Herod died and, when Publius Sulpicius Quirinius was appointed to office in Syria and the Taxation or Census that followed? The gap is something like 10-12 years between the "historical" events in Matthew 2 and Luke 2.
CtheWolfe 1 day ago
@CtheWolfe That's the one. Even the Catholic Encyclopaedia says that it is something that is hard to reconcile. but it also includes the slaughter of the innocents which also has no evidence to support it.
I've had a few varying reasons given to me, but none of them have stood up to close examination.
HonestMan395 1 day ago
@HonestMan395 Ah yeah I have looked into that one to. Herod's slaughter of the Rabbi's was well recorded; but no mention of the children at all. Also if you take this into account Jesus must have been 1-2 before Herod died even. I find it unlikely that Herod gave this order and died immediately as well. So that puts further strain on an already large gap in the years between the historical events of the gospels.
CtheWolfe 1 day ago
@CtheWolfe There's also an interesting aspect of the census story. The one that Quirinius was ordered to hold was only for Judea. As Nazareth was not in Judea, Neither joseph nor Mary would have been required to attend. Further more. Roman Census's were, in any case, conducted very much as they are today and everyone was counted where they lived. Nobody was expected to travel.
The whole nativity story is a myth made up by the early church to fit the supposed old testament prophesies.
HonestMan395 1 day ago
@HonestMan395 And does a very poor job of it too. I find it amusing when I read apologists trying to rationalize these points. I have heard it was one of the sons of Herod(neither of which were king). Or that Quirinius held office in Syria before(but he never)... or that he was governing in some capacity.... in which case why not name the actual governor of Syria? Its all rather silly attempts to bend truth.
CtheWolfe 1 day ago
@CtheWolfe It's not just the New Testament. I've been studying the bible and biblical history for over 50 yrs. What we have found out about Ancient Egyptian and Jewish history. It turns out that nearly all the major stories in the Old testament are just that, stories, with no basis in fact.
HonestMan395 1 day ago
@HonestMan395 Have you read "The Case Against the Case for Christ" by Robert M. Price. I had been considering picking that book up. Just wondering if you have any insight on it.
CtheWolfe 1 day ago
@CtheWolfe I haven't seen that one, but I'll check it out.
HonestMan395 1 day ago
@HonestMan395 I do believe its a complete refutation of everything Lee Strobels book The Case for Christ.
CtheWolfe 1 day ago
@CtheWolfe That wouldn't surprise me at all.
HonestMan395 1 day ago
I love when dumbass christians try and gain credibility by prefacing with "I used to be atheist, but".
StigmatiX 3 days ago
Isn't Josephus' writings regarding Jesus pretty much accepted to be forgeries?
revjimbob 5 days ago
@revjimbob
Thats what I understand as well.
1NX9 3 days ago
That guy interrupts too much.
bowser5295 6 days ago
Not that you atheists would know the difference, but the roman catholic church throughout the ages has been hiding behind christianity. God is not in the vatican. The RCC are the true heretics. And they only killed those who challenged the RCC's teachings, they did not execute people of other religions, least of all- atheists. Do your homework. Look up the Reformation.
jct09100 1 week ago
@jct09100
We atheists know full well that "god" is not in the Vatican, because your god does not exist.
DaToNyOyO 1 week ago
Not one atheist was ever burned at the stakes. The only people burned at the stakes were Christ's true followers who held that the sacrifice in the communion was symbolic, not a magic priest or popes power to piss in the wind and magically transform the wine and wafer... these people were practicing christians who were labeled as "heretics" for defying the doctrines of the filthy roman catholic church.
jct09100 1 week ago
@jct09100
"Not one atheist was ever burned at the stakes"
That's a bold claim and just the sort of baseless nonsense I'd expect from a theist. Go on, go ahead and cite your source(s) of this nugget of bunk.
Do you want to know how I can be certain that your are wrong and dishonest?
Because of the tens of thousands of people murdered by your religion(s) you have not spoken to a single one, with regards to their personal system of belief. You are merely asserting a religious belief onto them.
DaToNyOyO 1 week ago
500 eyewitness accounts of people who saw jesus alive after his ressurection. Among them were some that denied him befire his death. They are also the ones that testified of him after he was ressurected. They were persecuted, tortured and killed for their testimonies. If christ was not raised from the dead these men would never have been heard from again. Many christ believers have been killed for their testimony. Not ONE atheist ever died for atheism. Atheism is not a worthy cause.
jct09100 1 week ago
I'd be willing to bet atheists have died for atheism, afterall Christians historically haven't always been kind to non believers. I dare you to say no atheist ever got burned alive by a christian believer. Atheism is the freedom not to believe in God. That is as worthy a cause as freedom itself.
Staunts 1 week ago
@jct09100 Atheism is not a cause, it is simply the lack of a belief due to lack of evidence. As for the 500 eyewitness accounts - they don't exist. There is no documented evidence of Jesus' resurrection, so how can you claim there are 500 accounts? We keep hearing about muhammad - do you believe that the Koran is the word of god?
MrToby9999 6 days ago
This insecure atheist piece of shit can't have an intelligent conversation. He thinks he defeats his opponents by being rude, raising his voice and cutting them off.
jct09100 1 week ago
@jct09100 Haha... it's funny because you too are being rude.
IndubitablyMe1988 5 hours ago
dislike for the title
or
like for matts logic
hmmmmm.
Here0s0Johnny 1 week ago
Stobel is a gargantuan mendacious douchebag.
RaynorGo 1 week ago in playlist More videos from FFreeThinker
@RaynorGo Don't you think that is an insult to douchebags?
HonestMan395 1 week ago
@HonestMan395 Good point.
RaynorGo 1 week ago
its pretty devout to have a radio/internet show "devoted" to educating the world of the nonexistence of God.
ttone2379 1 week ago
@ttone2379 From what I can see, it's the callers who are trying to prove the existence of god. All Matt Dillahunty & Tracie Harris are doing is pointing out the blatent errors in the callers arguments.
HonestMan395 1 week ago
Does this show still air? I would love to watch it
G33KCNsE 1 week ago
Its strange to hear Matt the athiest calling on God for a break at 4:17.
soooooo89 1 week ago
'Early Christian Writings' Would be Jewish...
KuwaitF22 1 week ago 20
5:03 is Super Twin-Win
horbergus 1 week ago
The caller kinda 'tards out' at 3:10
hmmmwhatsnext 1 week ago
LOL, this prove that atheist aren't any more enlightened than other. former atheist now christian. what made him atheist in the first place, freethinking??? what made him christian now, freethinking?? your pick....me I am just ROFLMAO
glower125 2 weeks ago
I don't understand how these people can believe three thousand year old writings of olden philosophers like Aristotle and Plato and then not believe an account of Josephus or Tacitus, just because they lived after Jesus.
Jesus' timeline and chain of events was so major, that if it WAS true, people definitely would have been talking about it often, and in detail. Especially those who've witnessed miracles. By that way of thinking even an account 100 years after could be viable.
KeusFrench 3 weeks ago
@KeusFrench Would you mind showing the world ONE piece of irrefutable evidence for the salvation story... Certainly of such an earthshattering event there must be some evidence . The salbvation story doesn`t even make sense. Even Scriptures admit it. For the cross is nonsense to those who perish(non-believers) but to us ...
ndzoko 2 weeks ago
@KeusFrench Continued>> This god upstairs is really funny. One day he decides to redeem mankind, to atone for all their trangressions aginst his commendments. He decides to die for them, He chooses a people, and makes sure that they know that he is comming(prophecies) But they must not recognise him, otherwise they will not kill him. So he makes the prophecies very murky. His plot works. I admit this scenario is divine. ???
ndzoko 2 weeks ago
@KeusFrench Because Tacitus didn't claim that Jesus existed, but rather wrote down a story he heard with a bunch of other stories he heard. Josephus' one writing on Jesus was shown to be a forgery. Also, are you not aware that only the gullible accept that everything attributed to Aristotle and Plato is actually by them? There are some writings we can show reasonably well enough to believe they were written by the same person, and therefore attribute a name. Not the same thing.
EyeLickChildren 2 weeks ago
@KeusFrench If Jesus "Timeline and chain of events was so major "as you call it, why is it that during his lifetime, nobody wrote anything about him.
If there really was someone who made as big a splash as Jesus is supposed to have made; speaking to massive crowds, healing the sick, raising the dead, walking on water, etc.
Surely that must have created some interest in what was, a highly controlled and regulated police state. Yet no writer of the time even mentions him in passing.
HonestMan395 1 week ago
@HonestMan395 I don't know why. Perhaps they did and we just haven't found their documents as of yet. The apostles were far too busy following Jesus to have the time, which is why some wrote after His death. They have viable accounts of Jesus' actions.
KeusFrench 1 week ago
@KeusFrench When I said that nobody wrote about him during his life. I was meaning any of the 40 or so writers and chroniclers who were alive during that time.
As for the apostles. No-one nknows who wote the gospels, but most scholars now agree that they were not written by the apostles. In fact the gospels were anonymous and were not given names until around the 3rd century CE.
One thin is clear though, nothing was written about Jesus by anyone who actually met him.
HonestMan395 1 week ago
@HonestMan395 Okay well let's say that your claims are true.
Does that make other accounts about Jesus wrong? Or inaccurate? Just because they haven't met Him?
KeusFrench 1 week ago
@KeusFrench It makes the claims suspect. All we know about Jesus comes from the New Testament and writings derived from the it. There is no truly independent source of information.
It'd be the same as someone writing stories based on the old Ancient Greek or Norse legends and expecting them to be accepted as truth.
Without independent verification, they're just hearsay and as such can't be accepted as fact without proof, Especially as the N.T. itself disproves it's own stories.
HonestMan395 1 week ago
@HonestMan395 Okay, well how does the N.T. disprove it's own theories? You can't just make that claim without a basis...
And I can see where you are coming from. But how then can we trust writings on Aristotle? Or Socrates? Those are even more ancient texts. How can we be so SURE of those but not of the Bible?
I guarantee you, if the Bible did not talk about Jesus being "God", or divine, and it just gave historical accounts from the NT, then people would be more apt to believe it.
KeusFrench 1 week ago
Well, your right. If Socrates had continually wrote of supernatural events, we'd have to question his writings. Besides which, I don't think anybody is 'SURE' of the absolute validity of ANY ancient text. It would be like someone thousands of years from now finding stories of UFO abductions and claiming it's fact because someone wrote it down.
Staunts 1 week ago
@KeusFrench
"people would be more apt to believe it".
You mean, if you took out all the unprovable magic tricks? Yup, you're right there. Except that without corroborating evidence it would still be taken with a grain of salt.
DaToNyOyO 1 week ago
@DaToNyOyO By "unprovable magic tricks", you must mean Jesus' divinity, which I already took out in my example. So thank you for restating my argument, dimwit.
KeusFrench 6 days ago
@KeusFrench
No I mean Yeshua's cheap parlour tricks, fucktard.
DaToNyOyO 6 days ago
@DaToNyOyO lol k you don't make sense. Gather some intelligence before remarking
KeusFrench 6 days ago
@KeusFrench Gather some sticks before Sunday.
DaToNyOyO 6 days ago
@DaToNyOyO Kk dunce.
KeusFrench 6 days ago
@KeusFrench Mango.
DaToNyOyO 6 days ago
@DaToNyOyO Papaya.
KeusFrench 6 days ago
@KeusFrench Lol
The guy below me says "ask". Is he playing too? WTF?
DaToNyOyO 6 days ago
@DaToNyOyO haha I have no idea.
KeusFrench 4 days ago
@KeusFrench 1/1. Regarding Aristotle and Socrates. This is an old Christian strawman argument.
I think that Staunts has put it as well as I could in his last comment after yours. I would only add that other contemporary writers also corroborated both Socrates and Aristotle and the subjects they talked about at the time. There are no independent corroborating sources for the bible.
As for your idea of the bible being believed if it was just a history book. I beg to differ. Cont'd.
HonestMan395 5 days ago
@KeusFrench 2/2. Even as a history book it is widely inaccurate and unlike the Greek philosophers, it has very few corroborating sources other than itself and they only confirm the existence of certain places and people.
Most of the cornerstone events, such as Genesis, The Exodus, The Great kingdom of David, etc. are just legends and have no verification other than the bible.
Even the bible itself confirms that the nativity never happened. Cont'd.
HonestMan395 5 days ago
@KeusFrench 3/3. As for the life and miracles of Jesus, (which, by the way, all predate Jesus,) including the crucifixion and the resurrection have no verification in any contemporary writings other than the bible itself and Writings derived from the bible.
There were over 40 writers and chroniclers around during his lifetime, but not one mentions him even in passing.
Don’t you find that strange, considering all the amazing things he is supposed to have done?
HonestMan395 5 days ago 6
@HonestMan395 They have no other source because there is only ONE source. The Bible is the specific text for Christ, as is the Qu'ran for Islam.
And I am confused for your 2nd section on your 3rd post - 40 writers during Jesus' lifetime? Whom?
And also, there are tons of scholars and historians who find the Bible to be true and they can historically prove it. Yet there also people who claim to do the opposite.
To be honest, I don't think either side will ever give up or submit.
KeusFrench 4 days ago
ask
loki1397 3 weeks ago
Poor guy - those atheists are a tough crowd
nomesbirdy 3 weeks ago
Are there any Christians at all in this world with the courage to say "biblical tenets and those of my faith MIGHT be true therefore I will believe them in the hope they are true."
Show me a Christian with this much blatant, magnificent honesty and I will kiss and hug the SOB. If they could only step back and see just how intellectually and grossly dishonest they are being when they positively assert their belief system has its origins in the supernatural.
sammy2trees 3 weeks ago
Brilliantly Said.
123bozzyboo 3 weeks ago
Brilliant.
123bozzyboo 3 weeks ago
im still on the search for an atheist vs a satanist argument.
SuperTmoney86 3 weeks ago
"I am an EX ATHEIST...." ...mouahahahahahahahahahahahaha..... when exactly where you an ATHEIST, when you were born and you were not corrupted YET by indoctrination of the Church and the MORONIC people who think they know GOD.
SuperDelusionist 3 weeks ago
Amazing that so many fundamentalists AND alien abductees all come from the USA.
daverigby23 3 weeks ago
"Here goes some proof...right." Awesome way to start an argument imo, lol.
xynth101088 3 weeks ago
If the NT can be disregarded because of gaps between the originals and earliest copies, then we must also disregard the writings of Homer, Herodotus, Socrates, Plato and Aristotle. These authors' works have several hundred year gaps between the originals and earliest copies whereas with the NT it is only a hundred years at the most. Why not doubt Aristotle, whose works have a 1400 year gap between the date written and earliest copies? Why believe Socrates at all?
BachScholar 3 weeks ago
@BachScholar I must have missed the part where people tried to use the writings of Homer et al, as evidence that they were divine.
ShiftyWeasel 3 weeks ago
@ShiftyWeasel Homer and other authors never claimed to be divinely inspired, so your argument makes no sense. Besides, I am not talking about God but about authentic authorship. If someone claims the gospels weren't really MMLJ's testimonies because they may have been penned by someone else (a friend or disciple of MMLJ most likely), then using the same logic Socrates' philosophies were not really Socrates since they were actually written by Plato.
BachScholar 3 weeks ago
@BachScholar I wasn't making an argument. I was pointing out the irrelevancy of yours--namely, that comparing the works of various Greek authors to the gospel accounts in the NT doesn't mean anything. You started off with "If the NT can be disregarded because of gaps..." even though nobody is discounting it. No one (here) discounts the existence of Jesus, or that he was a prophet of some renown. They dispute the holding up of the gospels as evidence for Jesus' divinity/existence of God.
ShiftyWeasel 3 weeks ago
@BachScholar You also said, "Why not doubt Aristotle" and "Why believe Socrates at all". Those are meaningless statements. Doubt Aristotle about what? Not believe Socrates about what? I know what you were TRYING to say, but your argument was cobbled together rather poorly.
ShiftyWeasel 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@BachScholar
"Why believe Socrates at all?
Who "believes" Socrates now? It not the point of his writing. Homer, Herodotus, Socrates, Plato and Aristotle didn't write dogma. They were open minded philosophers that tried to find out how the world works. Also, our world today is very different, and we know more than the philosophers. They didn't squeeze their round world into a square box like religious dogma does.
anyway you're basically comparing apples and oranges.
aNdYmAtTeR 1 week ago
I also don't believe in evolution. If evolution is based on mutations, which are always random (scientific fact), then why are these mutations in evolution supposively always positive. Also, if we supposively came from "early humans" (australopithecus, homo erectus, etc), who came from monkeys/gorillas, then why did these early humans die out while the monkeys/gorillas are still alive when the mutations in evolution are "positive mutations." There are many gaps in evolution that people don't see
LiamK26 3 weeks ago
@LiamK26 They aren't always positive. The thing is that negative mutations reduce chances of survival, so if someone/thing has a negative mutation their chances of surviving long enough to pass is on through mating, or even being chosen as a mate are significantly reduced. For example a deer with a mutation that gives it a hyper fast metabolism will need more food, and probably die of starvation before it can mate, or it will look too sickly and thin for any other deer to choose it as a mate
titans091052 3 weeks ago
@titans091052 Exactly. In fact, I've never heard of a mutation that was positive. For example: there are people who have the mutation of being immune to malaria. However, anybody who possesses the mutation of being immune to malaria also has sickle cell anemia.
LiamK26 3 weeks ago
@LiamK26 If you gain a negative mutation you are less likely to reproduce.
Imbabrox 3 weeks ago
@LiamK26 It is obviously from what you say about Evolution that you haven't the slightest idea of what you are talking about.
I would imagine that you have obtained what "knowledge" you have solely from Creationist websites and videos.
Have you ever actually read Darwin's "On the Origin of species", or in fact any serious book on Evolution?
If you are going to discuss any subject, at least get a basic knowledge of it, then you won't look such a idiot.
HonestMan395 3 weeks ago
@HonestMan395 Don't sit there and call me an idiot without actually disproving anything I said. That way you won't wind up looking like an idiot.
LiamK26 4 days ago
@LiamK26 If you don't want to be called an idiot, don't act like one.
It would be difficult to explain evolution by natural selection to you because you obviously don't even have the knowledge of a year seven school student when it comes to the subject and, I suspect, you have no intention of gaining such knowledge. That would upset your fairy stories of creation.
On that basis, I have no intention of wasting my time on someone who displays such wilful ignorance with such pride.
HonestMan395 4 days ago
Any time someone begins to state 'proof' with, "How do you explain"....automatically loses.
IndubitablyMe1988 4 weeks ago
If this all happened by chance, then why haven't we found any other trace of life in the universe? If you ever learn about biology, you would realize how complicated the human body is. There is also no other creature in the world or in the universe that has the mind of a human, one that has free will - the freedom to make your own choice. Wake up guys, the answer is right there in front of you.
LiamK26 4 weeks ago
@LiamK26 You are wrong on so many level's. We haven't 'found' any extraterestrial life because we do not have the mean's to travel to any of the other zillion galaxies in our lifetime, and to know that there are zillions of other galaxies that we have no idea about while assuming we are the only life froms is really, really egocentric. There are 'traces' of life in our very own galaxy, btw.
There are no other creatures yet.. and you can thank evolution for that, but free will is an illusion.
IndubitablyMe1988 4 weeks ago
@IndubitablyMe1988 Hi :) It's possible there is life on other planets. It's hard to believe that God the creator of this vast & beautiful universe didn't put intelligent life on other planets. Our animals are smart & learn, but they don't have a spirit. They have a soul & body. What makes us unique is God created us in His image. He breathed His spirit into us. Were were made for the Lords enjoyment, because he wants a relationship with us. The same way we enjoy being with ppl we love.
robiwil2 4 weeks ago
@robiwil2 That sound's really beautiful and all, but there is no evidence for that at all. Why we're there no mention's of other planet's and universe's in the Bible? God should have had some knowledge to bestow on his disciples with concern to the universe. The Bible is actually written quit the opposite, with emphasis on geocentric theory. That the Earth so important that God created life only on this planet, in his image. You can't say now, in hindsight, that "oh there may be extraterestrial
IndubitablyMe1988 1 week ago
@robiwil2 life on other planet", and try to sink that viewpoint up with the Bible, because it's totally contradictory.
IndubitablyMe1988 1 week ago
@IndubitablyMe1988 Sync*
SeedsOfHatred 1 week ago
@SeedsOfHatred Thank you so much for pointing out a YouTube spelling error. Much appreciated... but how do you have the time to read through endless amounts of YouTube posts, just to try and one-up people, not on substance, but on misspelled words, and still have enough time to scult those sweet abs, bruh? That's pretty impressive. I bet the chick's are all up on that, amirite?
IndubitablyMe1988 6 days ago
@IndubitablyMe1988 Just helping you out with some friendly, non-threatening assistance, kiddo.
In any case, pointing out misspelled words is actually quite a workout. Hence the abs, you see.
SeedsOfHatred 5 days ago
@LiamK26 Everything you said is wrong. Sorry.
IndubitablyMe1988 4 weeks ago
robiwil2: This show is proof positive there IS NO GOD (or at least none worth worshipping). Not a single person has called in to defend Yahweh to any one's satisfaction. Matt and his gang always win the argument, or at least tie. You need to actually think about what is being said, and not act like a 4 year old child defending Santa Claus only so you will get a gift at xmas. You can't give up the idea of God anymore than a child and Santa : for the same reasons - the gift.
nosuchthing8 4 weeks ago
Hey, he went to Caltech.
YawnGod 4 weeks ago
@YawnGod For one year. He's a dropout.
SuperFantasticFox 4 weeks ago
They never let the callers defend themselves. They always interrupt the callers, therefore of course they are going to win the argument.
So IN MY OPINION, Alan won this argument, without even having to defend himself. Matt, learn to bite your tongue once in awhile. It doesn't matter how much knowledge of something you have, because as soon as you turn into a dick, you lose your credibility.
qpstrafe 4 weeks ago
Oh wow! Someone who finally stands up for themselves against Matt's semantic bullshit. Matt has more denial than any Christian could possibly have. I may not believe in the Christian god, I may not believe in ANY god, but I do understand when someone is being an ass hole.
Alan hung up because he didn't like being interrupted constantly. I swear, these show hosts are going to CONVERT ME TO CHRISTIANITY, just because their constant interruptions and flat out bullshit. Just let the caller talk.
qpstrafe 4 weeks ago
I rolled my eyes when I the name "Lee Strobel"
SuperBspb 1 month ago
@yankwilliams He knocks at the door of our heart...because He is a gentleman & doesn't force his self on anyone.
robiwil2 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"Hahahahaha....LOL....ROFL...Ha¬hahahaha, you are a joke! Go now and take a shower, lose some weight, and learn to speak better! This is the only way you can become a sister wife"
eag11e
This is how an antimormon speaks and he says J.S was a con man and he is in Christ
dorisfenella 1 month ago
@nosuchthing8 the only ppl who wrote about Jesus were not only ppl who believed in Him...if you look into history the Pharisees are the ones who recorded all the miracles Jesus did...they did not believe in Him and they turned him over the the romans to be crucified. Can we please turn that jungle music off so we can really hear the conversation lol
robiwil2 1 month ago
Matt for president!!!!
nosuchthing8 1 month ago
MRG: No one outside the believers bothered to write about Jesus. That is the problem. Remember that Jesus healed thousands of people, conjured up the loaves and fishes for some other thousands, there were all those earthquakes and such when he died. But no one outside the faith ever bothered to jot this down. WMDs, UFOs, big foot could be real. What persuades people is evidence however.
nosuchthing8 1 month ago
Dracula: So if enough people wrote about Superman 200 years from now, that makes him real?
nosuchthing8 1 month ago
Uber: Please name ONE person (just one!!!!!) that 1) lived when Jesus lived 2) was not one of the converted 3) and actually wrote about Jesus.
nosuchthing8 1 month ago
Uberlaser: I think the whole point of the show went over your head. Anyone can write something down. The point is that not a single person (outside the bible) that could have actually met Jesus bothered to write about it, as far as we know. Josephus was born after Jesus died. It appears to be what it is - a legend grew up (about a real person or not) and when the legend had enough followers, someone wrote it down. Lack of evidence = WMDs, bigfoot, loch ness monster, UFOs. Get the point?
nosuchthing8 1 month ago
If deists are honest with themselves, they have to explain why every single deist has been demolished by this show. I mean, if Yahweh is real, he must be the lamest deity to ever exist. Yahweh is supposed to be the most powerful and most inteligent creature in the entire universe. Yet Yahweh can't get any of his millions of followers to defeat the logic on this show. Even if Yahweh does exist, this show proves that Yahweh is not worthy of our worship.
nosuchthing8 1 month ago
There is absolutely no way any mear man could have survived being beatin beyond recognition, whipped to where his bones were showing & nailed to a cross(tree) & stabbed in the side with His heart pierced, put into a cold tomb with no medical treatment for 3 days & then just came out like nothing happened, & in the middle of all this he asked God to forgive them...would u b so forgiving if this happened 2 someone u loved. Thats what God did 4 us. If thats not worthy of praise I don't know what is
robiwil2 1 month ago
allan got shit on.
KristoferLloyd 1 month ago
These people make Christians seem ignorant
RaptorRule77 1 month ago
@RaptorRule77 thats because the majority of them are. if someone tries to question them about their beliefs, they freak the fug out and run away. The majority of christians ARE ignorant. I don't mean that in the way people mostly use it, as in they're rude. I mean that in the literal meaning that they do not know, because all they know is the words their church tells them and refuse to listen to anything else.
KristoferLloyd 1 month ago
Hi @KristoferLloyd...I'm not ignorant...nor do I run away...this is not about a religion it is about a relationship with our Lord & Savior...it is a free gift that we want to share with the world...the gift of joy, peace, love & eternal life...we are held hostage and a ransom is demanded for our life...Jesus paid that ransom so we can be free. We don't earn Gods grace it is freely given :)
robiwil2 1 month ago
@robiwil2 I didn't say you were arrogant. I said the majority.
KristoferLloyd 1 month ago
@KristoferLloyd I know u didn't mean me personally...I just used the I sense of the word because ppl get so offended sometime...I know what u meant :) Happy New Year!
robiwil2 4 weeks ago
Who is Lee Strobal?
problemequalszero 1 month ago
@problemequalszero I don't know who he is either :)
robiwil2 4 weeks ago
"I used to be an atheist like you, but the i tool the bible to the ass"
thogz777 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
GET READY FOR THE WARNING NOW !!!
thewarningsecondcoming. COM
JezusSlave 1 month ago
When it comes down to it. Christianity, Judaism, and even Islam (a large chunk of the qur'an is copied almost directly from the Old testament.) rely on a book (the bible) which was written from the word of mouth, handed down myths and legends of superstitious goat herders and which even from a purely historical aspect bear little resemblance to what we know actually happened in those times.
This is even before we add in all the supposed miracles, which are copied from many other older religions.
HonestMan395 1 month ago
@HonestMan395 the Bible was not written by goat herders. It was written over a period of 2000 yrs by Kings, physicians, tax collector, fishermen, farmers, singer & shepherds The marvel is that a library so perfectly cohesive could have been produced by such a diverse crowd over a period of time which stagers the imagination. Jesus is it's grand subject, designed for our good and the glory of God is it's end
robiwil2 1 month ago
@robiwil2 Actually, nothing in the bible was written down at all until about 600BCE, during the babylonian exile.
Until then, What we call the Old Testament, was just a collection of folk tales, myths and legends that had been passed down by word of mouth and embellished for hundreds of years. It was then added to, subtracted from, edited and just plain invented until about 400CE, when it settled into the bible, more or less as we have it today, with the New Testament tagged on.
HonestMan395 1 month ago
@HonestMan395 What I said was it was written over a period of 2000 yrs. Actually the 1st laws of God were written by Gods own hand Moses broke those when the Israelites were worshipping an idol when he came down the mountain..Moses went back up the mountain to receive the 10 commandments written on stone. God also had Arron write on his staff. These were the beginnings of Torah. Moses lived 1300 yrs before the babylonian captivity.
robiwil2 4 weeks ago
@robiwil2 Where did you get this information from?
No doubt, from the bible or some writing derived from the bible. Sorry, but you can't use the bible to prove itself.
There is no evidence, outside of the bible that Moses ever existed and there is evidence which makes it unlikely that the Exodus, and therefore the giving of the of the 10 Commandments, ever happened, because The Israelites were never in Egypt in the first place. The whole story is just a myth.
HonestMan395 4 weeks ago 9
@HonestMan395 Well that's not quite true. Most sholars would agree that there was a small exodus of a mixed group of people who left Egypt which eventualy became Israel. This story of beginnings was mythologised into the acounts that we have now. This doesn't mean the Biblical acount is literaly true it just gives some explanation of it's origins.
gextvedde 1 week ago
@gextvedde 1/3. Yes, I agree that there is some evidence that a small group of people of Canaanite descent left Egypt and eventually joined the tribes of what was to become the Israelites, in Canaan, where they had always been. They, no doubt, brought with them stories of their “escape”, which were improved upon by each successive generation.
However, there is no extra-biblical evidence of anything close to being the huge exodus of slaves that the bible describes. Cont'd.
HonestMan395 1 week ago
@gextvedde 2/3. Also, other than the bible, there is no evidence of Moses, or even that huge army of slaves built the great building works.
Although Egypt of the time had some slaves, mostly domestic, it was not a slave economy. The Egyptians themselves, through a form of National service, did all the great monumental building works. They were very well treated with free health care, good housing and good food. They served for a fixed term, then went back to their families. Cont'd.
HonestMan395 1 week ago
@gextvedde 3/3. Another reason to doubt the exodus.
Throughout that whole period, Canaan was a garrisoned outpost of the Egyptian empire, which extended up to the Hittite southern border, so why would they go there to escape Egypt?
You have to remember, these stories were passed by word of mouth for hundreds of years before they were ever written down. That didn't happen until the Israelites were exiled in Babylon, so the stories could have been morale boosters for a defeated people.
HonestMan395 1 week ago
@HonestMan395 Yep I pretty much agree with everything you've said. I just think we have to be careful not to slide into saying "it's all bollocks" when the scholarship doesn't demand that. Of course even if we can show that there was an exodus of people I by no means proves the truth of Judaism or Christianity or that there is a God.
gextvedde 1 week ago
@gextvedde The thing is, the exodus and all that flowed from it, i.e. Moses and the Ten Commandments are the cornerstones of the Judeo/Christian religions. If the Exodus never happened then the whole edifice, if not destroyed, at least comes into serious question.
I've had christians justify their faith with, what I think is a real cop-out:
"The bible doesn't matter, because I've received the touch of Jesus."
If the bible isn't true, then god is no more true than Zeus or Wotan.
HonestMan395 1 week ago
This video proves nothing. FAIL.
Thinchap 1 month ago 5
The caller has this hostile tone. I dont know if Matt & Tracy recognized it. Or maybe it's just me.
88Keyz101 1 month ago
these guys are dogmatic idiots. Alister Mcgrath who is a molecular biologist and a former atheist is a true critical thinker.
henf5671 1 month ago
Another Strobel acolyte bites the dust!
TheAikenHead 1 month ago
this is boring no one is saying like''fuck you man god exists''or ''shut up god doesnt exist!'',....that would be funny
halofan38 1 month ago
something can exist even it's not readily verifiable. The world was round even when the evidence available at the time suggested it was flat. Lack of evidence is not evidence of nonexistence.
j3cruz1 1 month ago
Holly shit, Matts knowledge of the bible is awesome. Nothing makes an atheist quicker than reading the holy books.
tkdtap 1 month ago 28
@tkdtap satan knows more about the bible than us so its not impossible for this guy satan use this guy to discredit God like how did he deceive some of the angels
SuperMamba78 1 month ago
@SuperMamba78 Will you try to put together an understandable and coherent thought that I can reply to?
tkdtap 1 month ago
@tkdtap what i said is satan knows the bible from front to back dats why its not impossinble for this guy to know the bible and satan used this guy to dicredit God
SuperMamba78 1 month ago
@SuperMamba78
What if the devil actually wrote all the holy scriptures to lure mankind away from god. When looking at all the misery that has followed organized religion, it would not be such a far fetched thing to think :)
jpindseth 1 month ago 30
@jpindseth why would you think the devil wrote the scripture when Jesus was tempted by the devil Jesus used whats written in the scripture to refute satan
SuperMamba78 1 month ago
@SuperMamba78 Think bigger. What if everything about all religions was made up by the devil, including Jesus, revelations, scriptures, etc. And if you say that it is not in the devils power, then what if he lied about that too.
You can not disprove my theory any more than I can disprove any religion or the existence of god.
jpindseth 1 month ago
@jpindseth OF COURSE NO-ONE can disprove the existence of God, in Philosophy, that's a falllacy. But if you have such theory, then you HAVE to prove it, because to claim existence of something requires something ALL religions fail to provide: THE BURDEN OF THE PROOF.
sentidocomunve 1 month ago
@sentidocomunve And this is the problem. It is impossible to prove/disprove "my theory" just like it is impossible to prove/disprove any other religion. They all fail if the burden of proof falls on them.
(also God if only relevant if he is personal. So discussing the existence of god does not seem that important to me. Rather discuss if god (if he/it exist) is personal or not)
Basing your life on any religion is just as strange as basing your life on my theory.
jpindseth 1 month ago
@jpindseth Hahah I love using that one on theists. Sometimes I'll go one step further and ask how they know god didn't lose the war with Satan and he has just been fucking with us all this time. :)
cidvisions 1 month ago
@jpindseth *grin* well played, Sir =D
PixelSlayer247 3 weeks ago
@jpindseth actually the original idea of an anti-christ is an early christian idea of that the accuser (using the orthodox jewish idea of enemy) would change the bible from what christ said to stray people from christ an god and use people like the catholics or protestants(just an example) to manipulate the scriptures so it would be anti christ so your not to off base mate
thatdutchguy420 3 weeks ago
@jpindseth LOL I like your explanation xD
smikesmike05 2 weeks ago
@jpindseth haha that's one belief I sometimes think about, this really could be true
InfinityDz 2 weeks ago
Can so be devout, I am a devout coward. cheers
nedladdy 1 month ago
Most scholars give more wieght to the internal evidence the Matthew and John wrote the gospels called by their names, than to an autographed copy. For the autograph couldve been forged. But the internal evidence of authorship is more subtle and gives rise to Jesus' teaching of non-exaltation of a man and his works.
Jesus often told his followers not to spread word of his miracles.
strengthinweakness1 1 month ago
lol what are they laughing about in the beginning?
Casshyr 1 month ago
@Casshyr life is good
brazilamaral 1 month ago
The people who saw Jesus wrote about Jesus story. John and Matthew are written by eye witness, in person accounts. John is by John the Apostle and leave little doubt who wrote the book of John. John wrote this about 70 years after Jesus death and Yes, John was a contemporary of Jesus and an eye witness. Just because he wrote it 70 years latter does not make in "not contemporary" . John is the best since it is an eye witness and one of the 12 selected men that Jesus lived with for 3 years.
MRGV7373 1 month ago
haha told! people there is no...yes we repeat no contemporary accounts!! done finished. How many times do historians, scholars have to go over this??!!
Marzattacz 1 month ago
@Marzattacz So get off your high horse on this. John and Matthew are both eye witnesses and contemporary accounts of Jesus. If I write about Bill Clinton today, I am an eye witness and a contemporary account. Just because the events are 20 years old does not make them less valid, I am giving a full, and accurate account of Bill's life even though I did not write it down for 20 years. Late does not mean "invalid" in mean later and still very good reliable history. don't be so foolish.
MRGV7373 1 month ago