Logic is not faith.Christ called the preaching of the cross foolishness, not logical.Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger then men. For since in the wisdom of God the world through wisdom did not know God ! It pleased God through foolishness of the message to save. Ravi suggests if you intellectually look at Christ you will believe, no.Morality is not God. Ravi suggests He is. God is above morality.Objective reason does not equal faith
@polopowers1 -Because those passages are speaking about the fool (from the humanistic perspective) who don't want to repent. A good example will be to look at atheists' arguments who find out all this salvation process to be unreasonable by not trying to grasp the reason of it.
@polopowers1 I think Ravi is saying that Atheism fails his three tests for truth (0:25 through 1:00). By the way, Paul said that the preaching of the cross is foolishness in 1 Corinthians; I do not know if Christ said a similar thing.
@polopowers1 Wow... where did u get this explanation? From your own logic? You seemed to know God personally. But for me I choose to put my faith where it is logical, rather than put faith in blind guides!
@HushAndLearn If Dendrochronology is so unreliable then how come it gives dates that are consistent with ALL other forms of radiometric dating? Obviously you are pulling facts out of your ass. I like how you just flicked over everything I said about the ice cores without really responding to them. Whatever. I'm finished with this conversation. You are a highly prejudiced, ignorant and closed-minded individual. I just can't believe you think you know better than...
@FrankieSayRelaxxx1 >>If Dendrochronology is so unreliable then how come it gives dates that are consistent with ALL other forms of radiometric dating?
--The misconception here comes by assuming linear weather or guessing climates. The problem using isotopes to date something is by using those unreliable premises. An example would be if you get into a room & see a candle burning, the problem is that they don't know if the burning time is linear base on several factors nor its original height.
@FrankieSayRelaxxx1 >>Obviously you are pulling facts out of your ass. I like how you just flicked over everything I said about the ice cores without really responding to them
--I thought you knew about how ice cores formed by warm/cold temperatures, I guess you didn't.
>>I'm finished with this conversation. You are a highly prejudiced, ignorant and closed-minded individual
--Ok, good luck in your journey.
The way to barrier the truth is to assume you already have it.
Wow, this guy is dangerous. He uses terms that sound relevant and meaningful without applying them correctly. He fools the audience into believing he has a solid argument without really saying anything. He's like an auto mechanic telling your grandma that she'll need a tempered high octane suspension for her water capacitor for $1500. Its the worst kind of manipulation, and he should be shunned by Christians and laughed at by everyone else.
@brandonbush1 -He don't need to say it because is going to take much longer, you can check out the evidence. For example the flood mentioned in Genesis, you can see all the evidence around the world from this event, ex. millions of fossils from rapid burial at high pressure, polystrate fossils, marine fossils on top of mountains, etc. Archaeological evidence you can check the existence of Pontius Pilatus which they doubt his existence before now it is prove he did exist. etc. etc. etc.
@HushAndLearn That wasn't my point. My point is that religion and the idea of god can be beautiful. But this things are beautiful BECAUSE they are illogical. They require FAITH and trust and they give some people hope when they feel helpless. The things you mentioned are not evidence. They have been mentioned in many other religions and cultures and are simply facts that don't support or refute a god. Bottom line, "god" and "logic and empiricism" can't and shouldn't go together.
@brandonbush1 >>But this things are beautiful BECAUSE they are illogical
--How can something be beautiful and irrational at the same time? Contradictions never bring legitimate happiness to begun with.
>>They require FAITH and trust and they give some people hope when they feel helpless
--Quite opposite, doesn't matter what denomination you are, you still requires a belief system to believe how life came to be, the difference is that the Bible comes from eye witness accounts, evolution not.
@HushAndLearn >> How can something be beautiful and irrational at the same time? Love is beautiful and irrational. Art is beautiful and irrational. Skydiving is beautiful (in a sense) and irrational.
>> Bible comes from eye witness accounts, evolution not.
No the bible is a story book. Some of the stories are based in fact. Most are not eyewitness accounts. Adam and Eve didn't write any of the bible, for example. The bible contradicts itself many times.
--Absolutely not, love is what keep this place alive. Love is the supreme ethic. Love is what create and preserves, hate kills and destroy. Truth is exclusive and not inclusive
>>Art is beautiful and irrational
--Depending the specific of it
>>Skydiving is beautiful (in a sense) and irrational
--Oh well, then I guess killing is beautiful too, depending the person you are talking about. But is not a legitimate beautiful.
@brandonbush1 >>No the bible is a story book. Some of the stories are based in fact. Most are not eyewitness accounts
--Quite contrary, the Bible was written for over 40 different writers of different cultures (fisherman to kings) in over 66 books which all that point to one perfect person, the person of Christ.
@HushAndLearn >>doesn't matter what denomination you are, you still requires a belief system to believe how life came to be,
No, you can simply say "i don't know". I don't have to have a belief system to determine how a PC exists. I can read the thousands of technical papers and equations that contain the info required to build one, and build one myself. It requires no faith. Christianity does. That's not a bad thing, but it's wrong to think that there is "fact" in god.
@brandonbush1 >>No, you can simply say "i don't know"
--You do, because you don't believe God create life and therefore you rely in a belief system to guess the way it came to be.
>>I don't have to have a belief system to determine how a PC exists
--Nor for the existence of life, because is well scientifically know that matter doesn't know what is adaptable and what is not in and of itself. So by common sense it must be a transcendent mind behind it
@brandonbush1 >>The things you mentioned are not evidence
--They absolutely are, because those things doesn't happen if it wasn't for a worldwide flood as many other examples I can give you.
>>They have been mentioned in many other religions and cultures and are simply facts that don't support or refute a god
--For the same reason you don't see a PC and assume it just came randomly for no reason whatsoever, same as the human body and yet it is way more complex than any computer. So is logic!
@HushAndLearn >> For the same reason you don't see a PC and assume it just came randomly for no reason whatsoever
1. I don't assume the PC came from nothing. I can build one myself. THAT is evidence or a PC creator (humans). It is repeatable and verifiable. Stories of walking on water and magical resurrection are neither. 3. you have a very obvious contradiction. you say something complex can't be assumed to come from nothing? Where did god come from?
@brandonbush1 >>I don't assume the PC came from nothing. I can build one myself. THAT is evidence or a PC creator (humans). It is repeatable and verifiable
--Yet, you don't conclude is possible for a PC to create itself before it was created, much less a dictionary was giving up by throwing ink in the air. Matter doesn't behave in a patter without a mind behind it. Same as DNA code, you can't just accept the word code and assume it did it itself, that's you belief base on pseudoscience.
@brandonbush1 >>Stories of walking on water and magical resurrection are neither
--And from eye witness accounts that give their life not for a lie, but for someone they knew and saw beyond just a belief. Jesus existence doesn't come only from the Bible but even external sources as well
>>Where did god come from?
--Only that which is finite need a cause, God by definition is infinite and therefore does not need a cause. It will be contradictory if you say before life was nothing.
@HushAndLearn >> Only that which is finite need a cause, God by definition is infinite and therefore does not need a cause
This is your belief's fatal error. You attempt (I believe unsuccessfully) to apply logic to all creation and then you stop when there is clearly no way to logically continue. By your "logic", I should be able to convince you that a pencil created the universe. I can say that the pencil is invisible and infinite. You cannot disprove it, so it must be true?
@brandonbush1 I don't intend to mock your belief, i genuinely respect it, but it is not fact based or logical. I am a scientist. Everything I do can be proven, and if it cannot be, we don't make up a solution based on things we can't see. We simply say, we don't know until we do. Your approach to knowledge is different. You make up what you don't know based on the invisible or your personal feelings, and then wait for it to be proven right/wrong. It is the fundamental difference.
@brandonbush1 >>but it is not fact based or logical
--Is that before life was nothing? And therefore nothing creates everything? Is that suppose to be logical and that intelligence came from none intelligence? Really?
>>I am a scientist
--Then use science to prove your point if is that you start making absolutes rejections because there is no absolutes in science
>>Everything I do can be proven, and if it cannot be, we don't make up a solution based on things we can't see
@brandonbush1 >>We simply say, we don't know until we do
--But you know that a PC can't become by itself randomly, then why life can? If PCs as living organisms are made of matter. Yet a human body is way more complex than any other thins that humans can create. This is scientific fact.
>>You make up what you don't know based on the invisible or your personal feelings
--I made things up base on science, knowledge and reasoning. We don't see such complexity and assume it was the nothingness!
@brandonbush1 >>to apply logic to all creation and then you stop when there is clearly no way to logically continue
--What is that it suppose to be before in that infinite regression? Nothing? That is a fatal error, therefore it must be someone the entire time to even produce the first cause that is uncaused.
>>By your "logic", I should be able to convince you that a pencil created the universe
--By logic, pencils have no intelligence to do anything, much less life nor a PC
@brandonbush1 >>Right, and by logic, god doesnt exist
--God is not a pencil, what incongruent argument!
>>he exists as much as a unicorn. how is god diff than a unicorn?
--For heaven sake brandonbush, you are not even trying to grasp my point. Life can't just exist because the nothingness have reasons for it. Matter doesn't know what is adaptable & what is not. Intelligence can't come from none intelligence.
@brandonbush1 >>Why? its as proven as gravity.Again, I dont think u understand evo
--I don't think u understand evo since you are comparing gravity with it. Gravity I can repeat, test & demonstrate the ENTIRE event form that scientific knowledge. You CAN'T repeat, test, observe nor demonstrate evolution in its entire event or at large scale for that matter; not even beyond its taxonomy family. All you see is adaptation & unscientifically assume it therefore can at large one, you are a believer.
@HushAndLearn You seem to be completely ignorant of the MOUNTAINS of evidence for evolution. Not only does the genetic evidence very strongly support that life today has evolved from earlier forms, but the evidence provided by paleontology also supports it. Adaptation as a result of beneficial mutations in individuals who have then gone on to procreate so that their beneficial genes are passed on, so that with time a large number of them survive have been OBSERVED. That is evolution.
@HushAndLearn "I tell you thins, those thin strata layer and polystrate fossils is clearly evidence of a flood" Could you elaborate more on that please?
I find your arrogance to be absolutely astounding! You actually think you know more about evolution, reproduction and the passing of genes on to offspring than the scientists in the relevant fields do! Are you a scientist? Do you have a masters degree in paleontology or evolutionary (in fact any form of) biology?...
--Fossils does't preserve easily if it wasn't for the rapid burial at high pressure. Nor there is erosion between layer. This phenomena only occurs by water and not by volcanoes' activities
>>You actually think you know more about evolution
--No when all I saying are facts, not personal opinion since this is what science shows. Anything beyond that are personal interpretations
@HushAndLearn Let me guess, did you learn these "facts" from other creationists or from creationist websites? You do know they like to mis-represent and just downright lie about scientific theories, in order to further their own cause?
Common sense is worth next to nothing on topics you are completely uneducated about. A-level biology is difficult because of the sheer amount of stuff you need to learn, A Bachelor's degree in a specific area of biology would be equally as hard...
@HushAndLearn Yes that statement does make sense. This is not an ad hominem attack but I can see your english isn't great, so you must have misunderstood due to some language barrier. Let me give you an example as to how the statement I made works: You are to take an exam for AS-level biology, how is common sense going to help you if you havn't studied for the exam? It is essentially what you are doing. You think you know better than the scientists do even though...
"No, it is from science" That statement tells me NOTHING about where you got your information from. It also tells me that you don't understand what science is, as it is not some storage media for knowledge, like a book or a CD-ROM, it is the name we give for the method scientists use in their attempts to explain the world around them....
@HushAndLearn ... "And therefore they have to think for you? Too sad?"
Are you seriously implying that we should just reject everything science has proven because we havn't done it ourselves? That is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard in my entire life. If you seriously believed that, then why don't you throw your computer out the window and make yourself a new one from raw materials without any books to help you. Also while your at it, if you ever fall ill...
@HushAndLearn ... don't accept any medicine the Doctor offers you, seeing as you didn't discover and concoct it yourself. Start from scratch and create your own why don't you!? Unbelievable...
... So you are saying the overwhelming scientific consensus on the theory of evolution is a conspiracy?
Well, I am no scientist, I have a degree but not in any of the relevant fields, I have no expertise on the matter at all. But I will do my best to present the evidence to you...
--That is because you can observe, repeat, test and demonstrate the entire result of the evidence; in the case of evolution you just see the evidence and fill it up with none sense fitting more the pseudoscientific term.
>>o you are saying the overwhelming scientific consensus on the theory of evolution is a conspiracy?
--Evolution is not even a theory just because some people claim to be, but rather more a theosophy.
@FrankieSayRelaxxx1 >>Now, I seem to have missed the assertion you keep asking me to try and debunk. Could you please make that assertion now?
--Yea, PC and vaccines comes from a scientific observation of the ENTIRE EVENT, evolution at that large scale as you shamefully believe is not science not even a theory. Science clearly shows that organism adapt with limits in it...such as heat for example, an organism can adapt to certain degrees of heat but not all levels of it, etc.
@FrankieSayRelaxxx1 >> I'm getting the feeling you are either really really stupid and ignorant, or just really really good at trolling. Are you trolling?
--I guess just because you said so, yet no science at all. Thanks!
--Lets beguine, the worldwide flood left clear evidence such as thin strata layer with no erosion and no lumps among them as fossils themselves are prove of a rapid burial at high pressure and also polystrate fossils ,etc. etc. etc. I can't fit them all, but this is a clear compelling evidence of a world wide flood and not evolution.
@HushAndLearn Hahaha, there are hundreds of problems with a worldwide flood. A global flood, if it happened, would have produced evidence contrary to what we have today. Seeing as the flood is meant to have happened at most 10,000 years ago, how come tree-ring records go back further than this?
Also why is there no evidence of the flood in ice-core series? Ice cores from Greenland have been dated back more than 40,000 years by counting annual layers...
@FrankieSayRelaxxx1 >>Ice cores from Greenland have been dated back more than 40,000 years by counting annual layers
--Absolutely not, all those ice layer shows is warm/cold layers which you can get up to 10 in one week (or more). So that is not a well scientific foundation statement to assume that it shows 40,000 yrs assuming weather to be linear.
@HushAndLearn There are soooo many problems with a global flood, including in the fossil record. Are you going to accept my points so that I can continue or did they fall on deaf ears (or blind eyes in this case)?
@HushAndLearn ... the scientists even though you have NO qualifications or experience in the relevant fields of your own. You claim everything you say is backed up by science, yet you have repeatedly demonstrated you don't have a clue what science actually is! Your arrogance and your refusal to accept the facts make talking to you extremely tedious and I'm not going to bother anymore. Say what you like, you are nothing but a religious nutjob whom I have wasted far too much time on.
@HushAndLearn I get the feeling that if I were to even bother debunking your claims, you would take no notice and just go on having blind faith in whatever crap your favourite creationist website has been feeding you.
@FrankieSayRelaxxx1 >>and just go on having blind faith in whatever crap your favourite creationist website has been feeding you
--At least I am not the one that believes that before everything was nothing and that intelligence came from none intelligence. Even worst, you believe primordial slime create all this, and if you don't believe that then you are just another blind believer on whatever you don't even know what you believe. Yet, you don't believe in absolutes and reject God absolutely.
@HushAndLearn A worldwide flood would be expected to leave a layer of sediments, noticeable changes in salinity and oxygen isotope ratios, fractures from buoyancy and thermal stresses, a hiatus in trapped air bubbles, and probably other evidence. Why doesn't such evidence show up if it happened?
--Actually is quite contrary, we don't suppose to see air bubbles as volcano lava would be including erosion among them (which they don't). Even for those weaved layers would be a clear evidence for a flood. Google for: "Sandy stripes. Do many layers mean many years?"
Those sandy stripes are from a beach clearly from water phenomena event. Clear compelling evidence.
@HushAndLearn ... if not more so, and don't even get me started on Master's degrees or PhDs. My point is, if you lack even basic knowledge on the subject then how will "common-sense" help you? Empirical science DOES show you wrong. But you refuse to accept it based on nothing but lies fed to you by fellow creationists who are COMPLETELY unqualified on the subject. Instead of reading the opinions and assertions of people who obviously have an ulterior motive in displaying such information...
@HushAndLearn ... Do a bit of REAL research. Look in some textbook in evolutionary biology or paleontology that have been allowed to be taught at uni or in schools by the educational authorities. Now answer this question: Which source do you think would be more reliable? The textbook or some creationist website whose top priority is to spread its religion and not the actual science?
So what if some people with PhD qualified people believe in creation? It depends a lot on...
>>Look in some textbook in evolutionary biology or paleontology that have been allowed to be taught at uni or in schools by the educational authorities
--First of all, many of those evolutionary ramifications are taxpayer expense, which mean if they don't bring evidence of at least nonsense they will not longer support their theosophical assumptions. That's why they speak nothing more than pseudoscience.
@FrankieSayRelaxxx1 >>The textbook or some creationist website whose top priority is to spread its religion and not the actual science?
--Ok then, enjoy yourself
>>So what if some people with PhD qualified people believe in creation?
--I don't care the kind of degree someone have when it comes on self conclusions on the evidence, I can also give it my own, base on science, logic and reasoning which is something evolution doesn't have at any level beyond just their own personal interpretations
@HushAndLearn ... on area they have a PhD in. If its philosophy or in Kent Hovind's case, "Christian Education" from the none-accredited Mid-Western Baptist college then their assertions about biology and paleontology shouldn't be taken seriously. And even if they did have MEs or PhDs in evolutionary biology or another form of biology; they form at most 1% of people with those qualifications, if not less.
@FrankieSayRelaxxx1 >>from the none-accredited Mid-Western Baptist college then their assertions about biology and paleontology shouldn't be taken seriously
--I have to admit that he does have very valid points even if not all his points are right, but most of his are.
@HushAndLearn The level of support for evolution is essentially universal within the scientific community and academia, while support for creationism is minimal among scientists in general, and virtually nonexistent among those in the relevant fields: Biology, Paleontology, Geology, etc
@HushAndLearn ... I would be willing to bet my entire life's savings on it that you don't. What on earth makes you think that your 'interpretation' of the evidence, or that of your unqualified creationist buddies, is more reliable than 99.99% of the experts? You actually have the audacity to assert that the experts' scientific theories are nothing but 'personal pseudoscientific interpretation' while your unqualified assertions are fact? Can't you hear what you sound like? ...
@FrankieSayRelaxxx1 >>I simply cannot believe the arrogance of some people, i really can't.
-Ok then. Prove me scientifically wrong using science, literal science. If you think science is absolute, then someone else have problems...and that ain't me. I don't need someone else to think for me because of a paper. Too sad for those who rely on them for absolut everything.
@FrankieSayRelaxxx1 >>Adaptation as a result of beneficial mutations in individuals
--If that mutated organism is capable to produce offspring, it always go back to its original kind at 1st to 3rd generation, is not an ongoing process that lead to any a large evolutionary change
>>so that with time a large number of them survive have been OBSERVED. That is evolution
--It is not, because science had demonstrate that those organism are still into the same taxonomy family. Never shown otherwise
This man is nothing more than a charalton. His arguments for the correctness of his religion are weak, just like with all other apologetics. At least he hasn't sunk to the level of Strobel, or "God forbid".... Hovind haha! But seriously, if you really analyse what this guy says, you will find it is all a load of rubbish.
@DCAce00 This video is nearly 10 minutes long and seeing as I have a response for pretty much everything he said, I am going to be here all day if I responded to all of it! But I will just chose the bits I had a particular problem with. The 3 'tests' for truth right at the beginning. Zacharias only asserts that atheism fails all three, he does not provide an explanation. Also, he was lying about the 'physical evidence for the life, death and ressurrection of Christ'...
Intent is prior to content. What is your reason for arguing with atheist? Did Jesus Christ tell His disciples to argue or did He tell them to shake the dust off their sandles? It isn't impossible to love from a distance.
@Freedomremoved 1 peter 3:15 But in your hearts set apart Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect..
@olekristian91 So should we use scripture to break the laws God gave us? Sounds a lot like what the Pharisee's did. My issue is returning evil with evil and using Gods word and religion to justify it. Knowledge puffs up, that statement never fails. However, we do see "gentleness and respect" but if that doesn't work should we continue to argue our point?
@sfeltmate Hi Sfeltmate, I like to read science and about it's discoveries from someone who doesn't have an agenda, who is willing to just record the facts, and let the facts speak for themselves, not to try to disprove the existence of God with them. That's not happening in universities today. And that bias is hindering the progress of science.
@sfeltmate Hi again, I actually studied evolution in university, and had to memorize what I was taught, so I think that counts for non-critical analysis. I have heard Prof Dawkins expressing his views in smaller bits and have a basic understanding of what he believes. A brilliant man, learned, an excellent communicator. He doesn't have answers for the purpose of life, the ultimate origin of life, other than to say life may have been seeded here by aliens. And where did they originate from?
@HeisLord9876 Dawkins is a Scientist. And Science does not care what the purpose of life is. Science deal with nature. We may never know how or why the universe started, but we have a good idea of what hapened after it did. Some day we will understand Abiogenesis better.
He only says 'aliens' because he has an open mind and you can't rule anything out.
IF God made the aliens then you would accept evolution?
@gregrutz Isn't the statement "we don't know how the universe started" a concession that the universe has a beginning? How can something begin without something greater than it starting it? e.g. God.
@sfeltmate Hi Thank you for your reply. I was wondering if you perhaps you might be apprehensive of what you would see or hear if you asked Him to provide evidence of His existence? But wouldn't it be interesting to investigate? Are you not the least bit curious about the possibility there may be some evidence for His existence, and that it might be evidence that presents itself as personal revelation? The voice that I "hear" is not an audible voice; it's a thought that is not my own voice.
This has got to be the best speech I've ever avidnessed. This man is so confident in his speech that you are left with no alternatives but to trust him ;) Ofcourse i believe in God, so it wont be a problem.
@sfeltmate >>You are passionate about your faith - and you have every right to be
--I am passionate of reasoning for then to have faith, not faith without reasons like you do. Yes, you do have faith by the fact not being able to scientifically prove your points.
>>However, you are overconfident in your ability to debate informed atheists
--Atheist by definition is a self contradictory statement, you don't believe in absolutes and yet, you reject God absolutely. I don't think thats very inform
@sfeltmate -Was that an argument against mine? Because that wasn't a scientific argument at all. Go ahead and believe matter have intelligence in and of itself and make your own fairy tale.
I don't think is very critical argument by sending me to read such and such books when you cant even defend your points.
You are just asking me to read more ignorant statements from other people. You are the one arguing here, not them. So you are the one to suppose to defend your points, not them.
@sfeltmate -So you believe a dictionary can exist by throwing ink to the air? Matter in and of itself doesn't know what is adaptable and what is not. How can you speak about the DNA code and ignoring the word code?
Your own body design yell out a creator by the complexity of your own body mechanism. You have the evidence of God in front of your own eyes and still didn't even notice it? You must be kidding.
About who is He, just look at the source, not just the believe ignoring the source.
@sfeltmate I believe in God because He answers my questions when I ask Him something, in a way that I can understand. Why don't you ask Him to reveal to you His existence? He's a Person. He listens. He answers. Ask Him for the evidence, and listen for His reply.
@sfeltmate I guess I'd say that the world around us is the primary evidence of the existence of God: the beauty and design of nature, things big like the Milky Way, and things small, such a spider's web. I honestly don't understand how anyone could NOT see the hand of God in something like the intricacy and intelligence behind the engineering of a spider web's design, and the impossibility of something with a brain the size of a pin prick to have somehow, by chance, designed it.
@sfeltmate >>It is your job - even according to your own holy book - to present credible evidence of your god's existence. You haven't done that.
--The fact of the matter is that life exist, and the fact of the matter is that you can't prove in any way how life came to be, so therefore that make you a believer. The difference is that I have logic, reason, eye witnesses, history on my side and you have none of that in your side.
A dictionary can't come to be by throwing ink in the air.
@gregrutz is Fuck you supposed to mean something? I can see the expression of aggression, is indication of lack of intelligent argument. You sound like a child. you might be...
Anywho- the questions are the same, the answers should be the same. People ask the same questions.
You are clearly have not used your mind to - even a sub-par capacity. If you had, even a modicum (feel free to look the word up) of synapses.....
@gregrutz CONT- this is stupid- You are blind. You believe that because you can't see- there is nothing to see- you deny the possibility of sight, and the evidence presented to you by those who can see. And you are wrong.To give truth to someone who loves it not is to only give him more multiplied reasons for misinterpretation. you have enough reasons. Don't you?
@gregrutz@gregrutz I'LL BE HONEST WITH YOU- if you are truly looking for the truth, youtube is not the place for you. however, i'll refer you to one last video in good faith-
pHRP0I2SrVs
---
I truly wish you the best in your search, and that the God I believe in will reveal himself to you in a manner that you cannot deny. Take Care Greg.
Excellent piece of work!! Thank you very much for Sharing!!!!!
What a way of meeting people and get to see their talent. At first was reluctant being on youtube, but getting to do this has brought me into the houses of some very special people. You are one of them. Life; isn't it wonderful!!! Keep up the good work. Hope You Are Having A Splendid Day!!!!
Both of you are wrong. Science is all fake and a conspiracy. Christianity is also all fake and stupid.
MY God is a flying spaghetti monster. Yes, it is a real God and he did create the universe. He also wrote a memoir, which depicted everything that happened. In it, he says that everything we currently see and know is a mirage - an illusion.
We won't find out the truth until we kill ourselves. So Christianity is a big lie. The only thing that makes sense is my God.
--You have no historical background to support such claim, and as if you search for it you'll find it as a parody of religion, so game over. For Christianity there is no such parody nor false claims accounts to be know, quite opposite, it is a well support it accounts, that you not only find in the Bible but also outside of it too.
@HushAndLearn: "You have no historical background to support such claim".
Oh but I do. It says so in the book. His Noodly Appendage visits me in my visions, I SAW Him... in his full noodly goodness.
And since everything we know (except the Flying Spaghetti Monster) is a delusion, that makes Christianity and Science a delusion. Logic, man, logic.. Oh, and game over.
"you not only find in the Bible but also outside of it too."
Oh I find spaghetti all over the place, not just in Bible!
@HushAndLearn "It seems that you are also claiming that we are not here at all"
No, we are here. But "here" is not what we think it is. We are in a delusion, like a dream. Science is all fake, Christianity is all fake, FSM is the truth.
"Yea, your book but no the evidence"
Evidence? Pasta is everywhere in our lives. FSM is omnipresent, you're just blind not to see him in your heart, in your sould. You are deaf enough not to hear his teachings. Evidence? We are here, that's the evidence.
@MegaCrazyTaxiDriver >>No, we are here. But "here" is not what we think it is. We are in a delusion, like a dream. Science is all fake, Christianity is all fake, FSM is the truth.
--Rotfl, jajajajaa, you have such a sense of humor. Don't worry, I do get your sarcasm.
>>Evidence? We are here, that's the evidence
--Ok then, let see how many people die for your lie.
Anyway, can you tell me if your FSM is evil, good or does it depends on our deeds to go to him?
@HushAndLearn: "Rotfl, jajajajaa, you have such a sense of humor."
Can't accept the truth? I know, logic hurts.
"Ok then, let see how many people die for your lie."
Not a lie, it's the truth. What does it matter how many people die for it?
"FSM is evil, good or does it depends on our deeds to go to him?"
FSM lies outside of boundaries of our primitive logic, so we can't categorize him as "good" or "evil". Follow His teachings and you shall be with Him. Otherwise, burn in Pasta Hell.
>>Not a lie, it's the truth. What does it matter how many people die for it?
--Because that show how reliable it is
>>FSM lies outside of boundaries of our primitive logic, so we can't categorize him as "good" or "evil"
--Bingo, that's why your FSM is not logically consistent because creation must contain love because love create and preserves, hate kills and destroys, so your FSM fall on its face by itself
@MegaCrazyTaxiDriver >>Logic is logic, it doesn't belong to anyone. Logic hurts u, because you are not smart enough for it
--Lol yea. I guess ^^
>>Islam is the most reliable religion then, most people r dying for it nowadays
--One thing is die for something you believe (Islam) and another thing is die for something you witness (Christianity) which is the case from the apostles.
>>FSM never killed a single person
--Jesus neither, Jesus is good, on your own word FSM is not good so game over
@HushAndLearn: You say "Agree" that witnessing = belief but then you say again that "for a believe, not for eye witness accounts".
Why constantly contradict yourself? Both religions have people dying for their beliefs in it. Islam has more though. So it's more reliable by your logic.
"Yea"
Exactly. Christian God killed. And HATE is what kills and destroys. Christian God has hate == bad, by your logic".
@MegaCrazyTaxiDriver >>You say "Agree" that witnessing = belief but then you say again that "for a believe, not for eye witness accounts".
--Islam rely on believes without witnesses but what in Muhammad said without any miracle support of any kind. Jesus did so many miracles and He resurrect from death with so many eye witnesses accounts that even the year start counting from around His departure.
And Christianity relies on beliefs that everything Bible said about eyewitnesses is truth. Saying there were eyewitnesses == nothing but a belief. Both are beliefs.
Dying for eyewitnessing = dying for belief. Simple as that. The same thing, just like science. Use logic. If two things are equal, dying for both of them is equal.
Once again, Islam has more people dying for it. So it's more reliable!
@MegaCrazyTaxiDriver >>And Christianity relies on beliefs that everything Bible said about eyewitnesses is truth
--It is history keep through generations, both historical accounts it is mentioned. Islam make no difference with Mormons for their prophet, Joseph Smith nor Muhammad did miracles nor spoke to God.
>>Dying for eyewitnessing = dying for belief
--A believe for what many different sources say and match through all those different sources from a fisherman through a king.
@HushAndLearn: "It is history keep through generations"
Exactly, and history differs from mouth to mouth. You rely on pure belief that what you're told is truth. It's all a belief, both christianity and islam.
"A believe for what many different sources say and match through all those different sources from a fisherman through a king."
Just because many people believe in a lie doesn't make it become true. Christianity is a good example of it.
--With the difference that God is perfect and know how, who & when He should come and speak, to be capable to preserve His word through time perfectly because God know the future & as the scriptures said [John 15:16] You did not choose Me, but I chose you
>>It's all a belief, both christianity and islam
--I believe Muhammad exist but I also believe Muhammad was a liar for common sense and reason for many reasons
>>Not reliable, based on nothing but faith. Both religions are. Both are the same. Check, and mate.
--Yea and your personal experiences on FSM neither. Base on nothing since you can't prove them to me, fatality ^^. Even worst because you have no personal evidence. O.O
@MegaCrazyTaxiDriver >>Just because many people believe in a lie doesn't make it become true
--But it does when it becomes through not only all these difference sources where they don't know each other, but also because of the evidence we see of some of the Biblical events described
>>Christianity is a good example of it
--Christianity is the only source of congruency, logic and reason. Original sin for example, that's the only way to explain why God separate from us and why do we have to die
@HushAndLearn: "Do you love your family? Yes or not? Prove it?"
I can't. I guess just like you can't prove they didn't know each other. And yet you base everything off of it. Game over.
"I haven't see him"
Nobody cares about you. Many people constantly see Him, including me. It is sad that people like you never enjoyed the glory of Pasta on their plates. It's still there and exists. Evidence, logic.
Religion -- the biggest logical inconsistency in the world. Hasn't provided humanity with new knowledge since the discovery of the scientific method.
MegaCrazyTaxiDriver 1 day ago
Logic is not faith.Christ called the preaching of the cross foolishness, not logical.Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger then men. For since in the wisdom of God the world through wisdom did not know God ! It pleased God through foolishness of the message to save. Ravi suggests if you intellectually look at Christ you will believe, no.Morality is not God. Ravi suggests He is. God is above morality.Objective reason does not equal faith
polopowers1 1 month ago
@polopowers1 -Because those passages are speaking about the fool (from the humanistic perspective) who don't want to repent. A good example will be to look at atheists' arguments who find out all this salvation process to be unreasonable by not trying to grasp the reason of it.
Regards.
HushAndLearn 1 month ago
@polopowers1 I think Ravi is saying that Atheism fails his three tests for truth (0:25 through 1:00). By the way, Paul said that the preaching of the cross is foolishness in 1 Corinthians; I do not know if Christ said a similar thing.
kitno84 1 week ago
@kitno84 Paul's word is Christ word though Christ did not speak it.There is no Ravi way and God's way when your representing Christ as a speaker
polopowers1 1 week ago
@polopowers1 Wow... where did u get this explanation? From your own logic? You seemed to know God personally. But for me I choose to put my faith where it is logical, rather than put faith in blind guides!
zonworks 1 week ago
Comment removed
FrankieSayRelaxxx1 1 month ago
@HushAndLearn If Dendrochronology is so unreliable then how come it gives dates that are consistent with ALL other forms of radiometric dating? Obviously you are pulling facts out of your ass. I like how you just flicked over everything I said about the ice cores without really responding to them. Whatever. I'm finished with this conversation. You are a highly prejudiced, ignorant and closed-minded individual. I just can't believe you think you know better than...
FrankieSayRelaxxx1 1 month ago
@FrankieSayRelaxxx1 >>If Dendrochronology is so unreliable then how come it gives dates that are consistent with ALL other forms of radiometric dating?
--The misconception here comes by assuming linear weather or guessing climates. The problem using isotopes to date something is by using those unreliable premises. An example would be if you get into a room & see a candle burning, the problem is that they don't know if the burning time is linear base on several factors nor its original height.
HushAndLearn 1 month ago
@FrankieSayRelaxxx1 >>Obviously you are pulling facts out of your ass. I like how you just flicked over everything I said about the ice cores without really responding to them
--I thought you knew about how ice cores formed by warm/cold temperatures, I guess you didn't.
>>I'm finished with this conversation. You are a highly prejudiced, ignorant and closed-minded individual
--Ok, good luck in your journey.
The way to barrier the truth is to assume you already have it.
Regards.
HushAndLearn 1 month ago
interesting video and very informative
ericajjful 1 month ago
Wow, this guy is dangerous. He uses terms that sound relevant and meaningful without applying them correctly. He fools the audience into believing he has a solid argument without really saying anything. He's like an auto mechanic telling your grandma that she'll need a tempered high octane suspension for her water capacitor for $1500. Its the worst kind of manipulation, and he should be shunned by Christians and laughed at by everyone else.
brandonbush1 1 month ago
@brandonbush1 -He don't need to say it because is going to take much longer, you can check out the evidence. For example the flood mentioned in Genesis, you can see all the evidence around the world from this event, ex. millions of fossils from rapid burial at high pressure, polystrate fossils, marine fossils on top of mountains, etc. Archaeological evidence you can check the existence of Pontius Pilatus which they doubt his existence before now it is prove he did exist. etc. etc. etc.
Regards.
HushAndLearn 1 month ago
@HushAndLearn That wasn't my point. My point is that religion and the idea of god can be beautiful. But this things are beautiful BECAUSE they are illogical. They require FAITH and trust and they give some people hope when they feel helpless. The things you mentioned are not evidence. They have been mentioned in many other religions and cultures and are simply facts that don't support or refute a god. Bottom line, "god" and "logic and empiricism" can't and shouldn't go together.
brandonbush1 1 month ago
@brandonbush1 >>But this things are beautiful BECAUSE they are illogical
--How can something be beautiful and irrational at the same time? Contradictions never bring legitimate happiness to begun with.
>>They require FAITH and trust and they give some people hope when they feel helpless
--Quite opposite, doesn't matter what denomination you are, you still requires a belief system to believe how life came to be, the difference is that the Bible comes from eye witness accounts, evolution not.
HushAndLearn 1 month ago
@HushAndLearn >> How can something be beautiful and irrational at the same time? Love is beautiful and irrational. Art is beautiful and irrational. Skydiving is beautiful (in a sense) and irrational.
>> Bible comes from eye witness accounts, evolution not.
No the bible is a story book. Some of the stories are based in fact. Most are not eyewitness accounts. Adam and Eve didn't write any of the bible, for example. The bible contradicts itself many times.
brandonbush1 1 month ago
@brandonbush1 >>Love is beautiful and irrational
--Absolutely not, love is what keep this place alive. Love is the supreme ethic. Love is what create and preserves, hate kills and destroy. Truth is exclusive and not inclusive
>>Art is beautiful and irrational
--Depending the specific of it
>>Skydiving is beautiful (in a sense) and irrational
--Oh well, then I guess killing is beautiful too, depending the person you are talking about. But is not a legitimate beautiful.
HushAndLearn 1 month ago
@brandonbush1 >>No the bible is a story book. Some of the stories are based in fact. Most are not eyewitness accounts
--Quite contrary, the Bible was written for over 40 different writers of different cultures (fisherman to kings) in over 66 books which all that point to one perfect person, the person of Christ.
>>Adam and Eve didn't write any of the bible
--Moses edit that book given directly by God
HushAndLearn 1 month ago
@HushAndLearn >>doesn't matter what denomination you are, you still requires a belief system to believe how life came to be,
No, you can simply say "i don't know". I don't have to have a belief system to determine how a PC exists. I can read the thousands of technical papers and equations that contain the info required to build one, and build one myself. It requires no faith. Christianity does. That's not a bad thing, but it's wrong to think that there is "fact" in god.
brandonbush1 1 month ago
@brandonbush1 >>No, you can simply say "i don't know"
--You do, because you don't believe God create life and therefore you rely in a belief system to guess the way it came to be.
>>I don't have to have a belief system to determine how a PC exists
--Nor for the existence of life, because is well scientifically know that matter doesn't know what is adaptable and what is not in and of itself. So by common sense it must be a transcendent mind behind it
HushAndLearn 1 month ago
@brandonbush1 >>I can read the thousands of technical papers and equations that contain the info required to build one, and build one myself
--And yet, a human body is way more complex than a PC
>>It requires no faith. Christianity does.
--But not a blind faith as evo does, because for the matter to have any sort of a pattern, it must first have a mind behind it
>>but it's wrong to think that there is "fact" in god
--Same fact as to conclude things doesn't create from an explosion
HushAndLearn 1 month ago
@brandonbush1 >>The things you mentioned are not evidence
--They absolutely are, because those things doesn't happen if it wasn't for a worldwide flood as many other examples I can give you.
>>They have been mentioned in many other religions and cultures and are simply facts that don't support or refute a god
--For the same reason you don't see a PC and assume it just came randomly for no reason whatsoever, same as the human body and yet it is way more complex than any computer. So is logic!
HushAndLearn 1 month ago
@HushAndLearn >> For the same reason you don't see a PC and assume it just came randomly for no reason whatsoever
1. I don't assume the PC came from nothing. I can build one myself. THAT is evidence or a PC creator (humans). It is repeatable and verifiable. Stories of walking on water and magical resurrection are neither. 3. you have a very obvious contradiction. you say something complex can't be assumed to come from nothing? Where did god come from?
brandonbush1 1 month ago
@brandonbush1 >>I don't assume the PC came from nothing. I can build one myself. THAT is evidence or a PC creator (humans). It is repeatable and verifiable
--Yet, you don't conclude is possible for a PC to create itself before it was created, much less a dictionary was giving up by throwing ink in the air. Matter doesn't behave in a patter without a mind behind it. Same as DNA code, you can't just accept the word code and assume it did it itself, that's you belief base on pseudoscience.
HushAndLearn 1 month ago
@brandonbush1 >>Stories of walking on water and magical resurrection are neither
--And from eye witness accounts that give their life not for a lie, but for someone they knew and saw beyond just a belief. Jesus existence doesn't come only from the Bible but even external sources as well
>>Where did god come from?
--Only that which is finite need a cause, God by definition is infinite and therefore does not need a cause. It will be contradictory if you say before life was nothing.
Regards.
HushAndLearn 1 month ago
@HushAndLearn >> Only that which is finite need a cause, God by definition is infinite and therefore does not need a cause
This is your belief's fatal error. You attempt (I believe unsuccessfully) to apply logic to all creation and then you stop when there is clearly no way to logically continue. By your "logic", I should be able to convince you that a pencil created the universe. I can say that the pencil is invisible and infinite. You cannot disprove it, so it must be true?
brandonbush1 1 month ago
@brandonbush1 I don't intend to mock your belief, i genuinely respect it, but it is not fact based or logical. I am a scientist. Everything I do can be proven, and if it cannot be, we don't make up a solution based on things we can't see. We simply say, we don't know until we do. Your approach to knowledge is different. You make up what you don't know based on the invisible or your personal feelings, and then wait for it to be proven right/wrong. It is the fundamental difference.
brandonbush1 1 month ago
@brandonbush1 >>but it is not fact based or logical
--Is that before life was nothing? And therefore nothing creates everything? Is that suppose to be logical and that intelligence came from none intelligence? Really?
>>I am a scientist
--Then use science to prove your point if is that you start making absolutes rejections because there is no absolutes in science
>>Everything I do can be proven, and if it cannot be, we don't make up a solution based on things we can't see
--Then reject evo
HushAndLearn 1 month ago
@brandonbush1 >>We simply say, we don't know until we do
--But you know that a PC can't become by itself randomly, then why life can? If PCs as living organisms are made of matter. Yet a human body is way more complex than any other thins that humans can create. This is scientific fact.
>>You make up what you don't know based on the invisible or your personal feelings
--I made things up base on science, knowledge and reasoning. We don't see such complexity and assume it was the nothingness!
HushAndLearn 1 month ago
@brandonbush1 >>to apply logic to all creation and then you stop when there is clearly no way to logically continue
--What is that it suppose to be before in that infinite regression? Nothing? That is a fatal error, therefore it must be someone the entire time to even produce the first cause that is uncaused.
>>By your "logic", I should be able to convince you that a pencil created the universe
--By logic, pencils have no intelligence to do anything, much less life nor a PC
HushAndLearn 1 month ago
@HushAndLearn >> By logic, pencils have no intelligence to do anything, much less life nor a PC
Right, and by logic, god doesnt exist. Or equally, he exists as much as a unicorn. how is god diff than a unicorn?
>> But you know that a PC can't become by itself randomly, then why life can?
I didn't say life can. evo doenst say life can. Based on this, I'm not sure you understand what evo is
--Then reject evo
Why? its as proven as gravity. Again, I dont think you understand evo
brandonbush1 1 month ago
@brandonbush1 >>Right, and by logic, god doesnt exist
--God is not a pencil, what incongruent argument!
>>he exists as much as a unicorn. how is god diff than a unicorn?
--For heaven sake brandonbush, you are not even trying to grasp my point. Life can't just exist because the nothingness have reasons for it. Matter doesn't know what is adaptable & what is not. Intelligence can't come from none intelligence.
>>I'm not sure you understand what evo is
--Just try to get my point
HushAndLearn 1 month ago
@brandonbush1 >>Why? its as proven as gravity.Again, I dont think u understand evo
--I don't think u understand evo since you are comparing gravity with it. Gravity I can repeat, test & demonstrate the ENTIRE event form that scientific knowledge. You CAN'T repeat, test, observe nor demonstrate evolution in its entire event or at large scale for that matter; not even beyond its taxonomy family. All you see is adaptation & unscientifically assume it therefore can at large one, you are a believer.
HushAndLearn 1 month ago
@HushAndLearn You seem to be completely ignorant of the MOUNTAINS of evidence for evolution. Not only does the genetic evidence very strongly support that life today has evolved from earlier forms, but the evidence provided by paleontology also supports it. Adaptation as a result of beneficial mutations in individuals who have then gone on to procreate so that their beneficial genes are passed on, so that with time a large number of them survive have been OBSERVED. That is evolution.
FrankieSayRelaxxx1 1 month ago
@FrankieSayRelaxxx1 >>You seem to be completely ignorant of the MOUNTAINS of evidence for evolution
--I tell you thins, those thin strata layer and polystrate fossils is clearly evidence of a flood
>>but the evidence provided by paleontology also supports it
--Absolutely not, all you have is personal pseudoscientific interpretation of the evidence, not science at all.
HushAndLearn 1 month ago
@HushAndLearn "I tell you thins, those thin strata layer and polystrate fossils is clearly evidence of a flood" Could you elaborate more on that please?
I find your arrogance to be absolutely astounding! You actually think you know more about evolution, reproduction and the passing of genes on to offspring than the scientists in the relevant fields do! Are you a scientist? Do you have a masters degree in paleontology or evolutionary (in fact any form of) biology?...
FrankieSayRelaxxx1 1 month ago
@FrankieSayRelaxxx1 >>Could u elaborate more on that please?
--Fossils does't preserve easily if it wasn't for the rapid burial at high pressure. Nor there is erosion between layer. This phenomena only occurs by water and not by volcanoes' activities
>>You actually think you know more about evolution
--No when all I saying are facts, not personal opinion since this is what science shows. Anything beyond that are personal interpretations
>>Are you a scientist?
--Do science show the opposite?
HushAndLearn 1 month ago
@HushAndLearn Let me guess, did you learn these "facts" from other creationists or from creationist websites? You do know they like to mis-represent and just downright lie about scientific theories, in order to further their own cause?
Common sense is worth next to nothing on topics you are completely uneducated about. A-level biology is difficult because of the sheer amount of stuff you need to learn, A Bachelor's degree in a specific area of biology would be equally as hard...
FrankieSayRelaxxx1 1 month ago
@FrankieSayRelaxxx1 >>did you learn these "facts" from other creationists or from creationist websites?
--No, it is from science
>>in order to further their own cause?
--Well then, prove my point scientifically wrong
>>Common sense is worth next to nothing on topics you are completely uneducated about
--That statement make no sense
>>A-level biology is difficult because of the sheer amount of stuff you need to learn
--And therefore they have to think for you? Too sad?
HushAndLearn 1 month ago
@HushAndLearn Yes that statement does make sense. This is not an ad hominem attack but I can see your english isn't great, so you must have misunderstood due to some language barrier. Let me give you an example as to how the statement I made works: You are to take an exam for AS-level biology, how is common sense going to help you if you havn't studied for the exam? It is essentially what you are doing. You think you know better than the scientists do even though...
FrankieSayRelaxxx1 1 month ago
@FrankieSayRelaxxx1 >>This is not an ad hominem attack but I can see your english isn't great
--Typical red herring
>>You think you know better than the scientists do even though
--Science isn't about absolutes if that's what you are implying.
HushAndLearn 1 month ago
@HushAndLearn ... you havn't studied it properly.
"No, it is from science" That statement tells me NOTHING about where you got your information from. It also tells me that you don't understand what science is, as it is not some storage media for knowledge, like a book or a CD-ROM, it is the name we give for the method scientists use in their attempts to explain the world around them....
FrankieSayRelaxxx1 1 month ago
@FrankieSayRelaxxx1 >>you havn't studied it properly
--Yet, you can't use science to prove your point
>>"No, it is from science" That statement tells me NOTHING about where you got your information from
--If it is science, then use it to prove your statements, because you haven't
>>it is the name we give for the method scientists use in their attempts to explain the world around them
--If that's the case, then the theory of the world wide flood fits better the evidence on scientific terms
HushAndLearn 1 month ago
@HushAndLearn ... "And therefore they have to think for you? Too sad?"
Are you seriously implying that we should just reject everything science has proven because we havn't done it ourselves? That is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard in my entire life. If you seriously believed that, then why don't you throw your computer out the window and make yourself a new one from raw materials without any books to help you. Also while your at it, if you ever fall ill...
FrankieSayRelaxxx1 1 month ago
@FrankieSayRelaxxx1 >>Are you seriously implying that we should just reject everything science has proven because we havn't done it ourselves?
--No, but because science change over time and take scientific as an absolute is not something pretty intellectual to do.
>>If you seriously believed that, then why don't you throw your computer out the window
--Because a computer comes from empirical science, not pseudoscience as evolutionism is.
HushAndLearn 1 month ago
@HushAndLearn ... don't accept any medicine the Doctor offers you, seeing as you didn't discover and concoct it yourself. Start from scratch and create your own why don't you!? Unbelievable...
... So you are saying the overwhelming scientific consensus on the theory of evolution is a conspiracy?
Well, I am no scientist, I have a degree but not in any of the relevant fields, I have no expertise on the matter at all. But I will do my best to present the evidence to you...
FrankieSayRelaxxx1 1 month ago
@FrankieSayRelaxxx1 >>don't accept any medicine the Doctor offers you
--That is because you can observe, repeat, test and demonstrate the entire result of the evidence; in the case of evolution you just see the evidence and fill it up with none sense fitting more the pseudoscientific term.
>>o you are saying the overwhelming scientific consensus on the theory of evolution is a conspiracy?
--Evolution is not even a theory just because some people claim to be, but rather more a theosophy.
HushAndLearn 1 month ago
@HushAndLearn ... Now, I seem to have missed the assertion you keep asking me to try and debunk. Could you please make that assertion now?
FrankieSayRelaxxx1 1 month ago
@FrankieSayRelaxxx1 >>Now, I seem to have missed the assertion you keep asking me to try and debunk. Could you please make that assertion now?
--Yea, PC and vaccines comes from a scientific observation of the ENTIRE EVENT, evolution at that large scale as you shamefully believe is not science not even a theory. Science clearly shows that organism adapt with limits in it...such as heat for example, an organism can adapt to certain degrees of heat but not all levels of it, etc.
Regards.
HushAndLearn 1 month ago
@HushAndLearn I'm getting the feeling you are either really really stupid and ignorant, or just really really good at trolling. Are you trolling?
FrankieSayRelaxxx1 1 month ago
@FrankieSayRelaxxx1 >> I'm getting the feeling you are either really really stupid and ignorant, or just really really good at trolling. Are you trolling?
--I guess just because you said so, yet no science at all. Thanks!
HushAndLearn 1 month ago
@HushAndLearn And no answer from you either. Thanks! :D
FrankieSayRelaxxx1 1 month ago
@FrankieSayRelaxxx1 >>And no answer from you either. Thanks! :D
--Lets beguine, the worldwide flood left clear evidence such as thin strata layer with no erosion and no lumps among them as fossils themselves are prove of a rapid burial at high pressure and also polystrate fossils ,etc. etc. etc. I can't fit them all, but this is a clear compelling evidence of a world wide flood and not evolution.
HushAndLearn 1 month ago
@HushAndLearn Hahaha, there are hundreds of problems with a worldwide flood. A global flood, if it happened, would have produced evidence contrary to what we have today. Seeing as the flood is meant to have happened at most 10,000 years ago, how come tree-ring records go back further than this?
Also why is there no evidence of the flood in ice-core series? Ice cores from Greenland have been dated back more than 40,000 years by counting annual layers...
FrankieSayRelaxxx1 1 month ago
@FrankieSayRelaxxx1 >>Ice cores from Greenland have been dated back more than 40,000 years by counting annual layers
--Absolutely not, all those ice layer shows is warm/cold layers which you can get up to 10 in one week (or more). So that is not a well scientific foundation statement to assume that it shows 40,000 yrs assuming weather to be linear.
HushAndLearn 1 month ago
@HushAndLearn There are soooo many problems with a global flood, including in the fossil record. Are you going to accept my points so that I can continue or did they fall on deaf ears (or blind eyes in this case)?
FrankieSayRelaxxx1 1 month ago
@FrankieSayRelaxxx1 >>There are soooo many problems with a global flood
--For you, not for science
>>including in the fossil record
--Fossil record shows they are death, beyond that is just personal imagination
>>Are you going to accept my points so that I can continue or did they fall on deaf ears (or blind eyes in this case)?
--As long as it make more sense than the facts that I am giving to you.
Kind regards.
HushAndLearn 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@HushAndLearn ... the scientists even though you have NO qualifications or experience in the relevant fields of your own. You claim everything you say is backed up by science, yet you have repeatedly demonstrated you don't have a clue what science actually is! Your arrogance and your refusal to accept the facts make talking to you extremely tedious and I'm not going to bother anymore. Say what you like, you are nothing but a religious nutjob whom I have wasted far too much time on.
FrankieSayRelaxxx1 1 month ago
@HushAndLearn I get the feeling that if I were to even bother debunking your claims, you would take no notice and just go on having blind faith in whatever crap your favourite creationist website has been feeding you.
FrankieSayRelaxxx1 1 month ago
@FrankieSayRelaxxx1 >>and just go on having blind faith in whatever crap your favourite creationist website has been feeding you
--At least I am not the one that believes that before everything was nothing and that intelligence came from none intelligence. Even worst, you believe primordial slime create all this, and if you don't believe that then you are just another blind believer on whatever you don't even know what you believe. Yet, you don't believe in absolutes and reject God absolutely.
HushAndLearn 1 month ago
@HushAndLearn A worldwide flood would be expected to leave a layer of sediments, noticeable changes in salinity and oxygen isotope ratios, fractures from buoyancy and thermal stresses, a hiatus in trapped air bubbles, and probably other evidence. Why doesn't such evidence show up if it happened?
FrankieSayRelaxxx1 1 month ago
@FrankieSayRelaxxx1 >>Why doesn't such evidence show up if it happened?
--Actually is quite contrary, we don't suppose to see air bubbles as volcano lava would be including erosion among them (which they don't). Even for those weaved layers would be a clear evidence for a flood. Google for: "Sandy stripes. Do many layers mean many years?"
Those sandy stripes are from a beach clearly from water phenomena event. Clear compelling evidence.
HushAndLearn 1 month ago
@HushAndLearn ... if not more so, and don't even get me started on Master's degrees or PhDs. My point is, if you lack even basic knowledge on the subject then how will "common-sense" help you? Empirical science DOES show you wrong. But you refuse to accept it based on nothing but lies fed to you by fellow creationists who are COMPLETELY unqualified on the subject. Instead of reading the opinions and assertions of people who obviously have an ulterior motive in displaying such information...
FrankieSayRelaxxx1 1 month ago
@FrankieSayRelaxxx1 >>My point is, if you lack even basic knowledge on the subject then how will "common-sense" help you?
--Yet, you can't use science to prove my points wrong
>>Empirical science DOES show you wrong
--Then go ahead
>>fellow creationists who are COMPLETELY unqualified on the subject
--Your arguments make no difference than any other atheist
>>Instead of reading the opinions and assertions of people
--I do, that's why I believe what I believe
HushAndLearn 1 month ago
@HushAndLearn ... Do a bit of REAL research. Look in some textbook in evolutionary biology or paleontology that have been allowed to be taught at uni or in schools by the educational authorities. Now answer this question: Which source do you think would be more reliable? The textbook or some creationist website whose top priority is to spread its religion and not the actual science?
So what if some people with PhD qualified people believe in creation? It depends a lot on...
FrankieSayRelaxxx1 1 month ago
@FrankieSayRelaxxx1 >>Do a bit of REAL research
--I'll been in this subject for years
>>Look in some textbook in evolutionary biology or paleontology that have been allowed to be taught at uni or in schools by the educational authorities
--First of all, many of those evolutionary ramifications are taxpayer expense, which mean if they don't bring evidence of at least nonsense they will not longer support their theosophical assumptions. That's why they speak nothing more than pseudoscience.
HushAndLearn 1 month ago
@FrankieSayRelaxxx1 >>The textbook or some creationist website whose top priority is to spread its religion and not the actual science?
--Ok then, enjoy yourself
>>So what if some people with PhD qualified people believe in creation?
--I don't care the kind of degree someone have when it comes on self conclusions on the evidence, I can also give it my own, base on science, logic and reasoning which is something evolution doesn't have at any level beyond just their own personal interpretations
HushAndLearn 1 month ago
@HushAndLearn ... on area they have a PhD in. If its philosophy or in Kent Hovind's case, "Christian Education" from the none-accredited Mid-Western Baptist college then their assertions about biology and paleontology shouldn't be taken seriously. And even if they did have MEs or PhDs in evolutionary biology or another form of biology; they form at most 1% of people with those qualifications, if not less.
FrankieSayRelaxxx1 1 month ago
@FrankieSayRelaxxx1 >>from the none-accredited Mid-Western Baptist college then their assertions about biology and paleontology shouldn't be taken seriously
--I have to admit that he does have very valid points even if not all his points are right, but most of his are.
HushAndLearn 1 month ago
@FrankieSayRelaxxx1 >>Do you have a masters degree in paleontology or evolutionary (in fact any form of) biology?
--Does common sense use one? Does empirical science show me wrong? Too sad if someone else have to think for you when it comes with papers.
HushAndLearn 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@HushAndLearn The level of support for evolution is essentially universal within the scientific community and academia, while support for creationism is minimal among scientists in general, and virtually nonexistent among those in the relevant fields: Biology, Paleontology, Geology, etc
FrankieSayRelaxxx1 1 month ago
@HushAndLearn ... I would be willing to bet my entire life's savings on it that you don't. What on earth makes you think that your 'interpretation' of the evidence, or that of your unqualified creationist buddies, is more reliable than 99.99% of the experts? You actually have the audacity to assert that the experts' scientific theories are nothing but 'personal pseudoscientific interpretation' while your unqualified assertions are fact? Can't you hear what you sound like? ...
FrankieSayRelaxxx1 1 month ago
@FrankieSayRelaxxx1 >>I would be willing to bet my entire life's savings on it that you don't
--Then do it to those who have it because believe it or not, there are PhD people that believe in creation (if that's you issue)
>>or that of your unqualified creationist buddies, is more reliable than 99.99% of the experts?
--Is not what I believe, this is what science shows
>>while your unqualified assertions are fact?
--Depending the subject
>>Can't you hear what you sound like?
--Sure
HushAndLearn 1 month ago
@HushAndLearn I simply cannot believe the arrogance of some people, i really can't.
FrankieSayRelaxxx1 1 month ago
@FrankieSayRelaxxx1 >>I simply cannot believe the arrogance of some people, i really can't.
-Ok then. Prove me scientifically wrong using science, literal science. If you think science is absolute, then someone else have problems...and that ain't me. I don't need someone else to think for me because of a paper. Too sad for those who rely on them for absolut everything.
Good luck =)
HushAndLearn 1 month ago
Comment removed
FrankieSayRelaxxx1 1 month ago
@FrankieSayRelaxxx1 >>Adaptation as a result of beneficial mutations in individuals
--If that mutated organism is capable to produce offspring, it always go back to its original kind at 1st to 3rd generation, is not an ongoing process that lead to any a large evolutionary change
>>so that with time a large number of them survive have been OBSERVED. That is evolution
--It is not, because science had demonstrate that those organism are still into the same taxonomy family. Never shown otherwise
HushAndLearn 1 month ago
This man is nothing more than a charalton. His arguments for the correctness of his religion are weak, just like with all other apologetics. At least he hasn't sunk to the level of Strobel, or "God forbid".... Hovind haha! But seriously, if you really analyse what this guy says, you will find it is all a load of rubbish.
FrankieSayRelaxxx1 2 months ago
what's the evidence in what he said that you found to be false?
DCAce00 2 months ago
@DCAce00 This video is nearly 10 minutes long and seeing as I have a response for pretty much everything he said, I am going to be here all day if I responded to all of it! But I will just chose the bits I had a particular problem with. The 3 'tests' for truth right at the beginning. Zacharias only asserts that atheism fails all three, he does not provide an explanation. Also, he was lying about the 'physical evidence for the life, death and ressurrection of Christ'...
FrankieSayRelaxxx1 2 months ago
@DCAce00 ... because there IS no evidence.
FrankieSayRelaxxx1 2 months ago
Disappointing response from the audience. No participation.
Youngsamsonful 2 months ago
NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH PPL. THIS IS NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH. ANYONE WHO THINK THIS IS BS IS SIMPLY A FOOL.
HtownRO 4 months ago 2
Intent is prior to content. What is your reason for arguing with atheist? Did Jesus Christ tell His disciples to argue or did He tell them to shake the dust off their sandles? It isn't impossible to love from a distance.
Freedomremoved 5 months ago in playlist [ Ravi Zacharias ]
@Freedomremoved 1 peter 3:15 But in your hearts set apart Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect..
olekristian91 4 months ago
@olekristian91 So should we use scripture to break the laws God gave us? Sounds a lot like what the Pharisee's did. My issue is returning evil with evil and using Gods word and religion to justify it. Knowledge puffs up, that statement never fails. However, we do see "gentleness and respect" but if that doesn't work should we continue to argue our point?
Freedomremoved 4 months ago
Another DR. who didn't graduate for college. LOL
gregrutz 5 months ago
BRILLIANT!
ScreeminMeeme 6 months ago 2
This is a profound answer...This man is a great speaker and mind.
doobersmanster 6 months ago
the man is really anointed humility faith and love ty jesus for your word
wertguy 6 months ago 4
@sfeltmate Hi Sfeltmate, I like to read science and about it's discoveries from someone who doesn't have an agenda, who is willing to just record the facts, and let the facts speak for themselves, not to try to disprove the existence of God with them. That's not happening in universities today. And that bias is hindering the progress of science.
HeisLord9876 7 months ago
@sfeltmate Hi again, I actually studied evolution in university, and had to memorize what I was taught, so I think that counts for non-critical analysis. I have heard Prof Dawkins expressing his views in smaller bits and have a basic understanding of what he believes. A brilliant man, learned, an excellent communicator. He doesn't have answers for the purpose of life, the ultimate origin of life, other than to say life may have been seeded here by aliens. And where did they originate from?
HeisLord9876 7 months ago
@HeisLord9876 Dawkins is a Scientist. And Science does not care what the purpose of life is. Science deal with nature. We may never know how or why the universe started, but we have a good idea of what hapened after it did. Some day we will understand Abiogenesis better.
He only says 'aliens' because he has an open mind and you can't rule anything out.
IF God made the aliens then you would accept evolution?
gregrutz 6 months ago
@gregrutz Isn't the statement "we don't know how the universe started" a concession that the universe has a beginning? How can something begin without something greater than it starting it? e.g. God.
DavidUmstattd 6 months ago
@DavidUmstattd Time started sometime. Before that there was not time. If there was a god before that, how do you know Allah is the one true god?
gregrutz 6 months ago
@DavidUmstattd '' e.g. God'' You do mean Allah, right?!? The FSM?
gregrutz 5 months ago
@sfeltmate Hi Thank you for your reply. I was wondering if you perhaps you might be apprehensive of what you would see or hear if you asked Him to provide evidence of His existence? But wouldn't it be interesting to investigate? Are you not the least bit curious about the possibility there may be some evidence for His existence, and that it might be evidence that presents itself as personal revelation? The voice that I "hear" is not an audible voice; it's a thought that is not my own voice.
HeisLord9876 7 months ago
This has got to be the best speech I've ever avidnessed. This man is so confident in his speech that you are left with no alternatives but to trust him ;) Ofcourse i believe in God, so it wont be a problem.
MrVirtualCoder 7 months ago
@sfeltmate >>You are passionate about your faith - and you have every right to be
--I am passionate of reasoning for then to have faith, not faith without reasons like you do. Yes, you do have faith by the fact not being able to scientifically prove your points.
>>However, you are overconfident in your ability to debate informed atheists
--Atheist by definition is a self contradictory statement, you don't believe in absolutes and yet, you reject God absolutely. I don't think thats very inform
HushAndLearn 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@HushAndLearn Atheist by definition is a self contradictory statement, you don't believe in absolutes and yet, you reject God absolutely.''
That is the stupidist shit I have ever heard. There would not be any atheists if you had ANY evidence for a god or gods or even 3 in 1 gods.
''...not being able to scientifically prove your points.''
And what would prove evolution to you?
gregrutz 6 months ago
@sfeltmate >>I cannot debate with you until you have the prerequisite knowledge to understand what I am saying
--Beguine by saying something at least, because you haven't
>>I am able to judge your sophistication level from your questions
--From which you can't give a sophisticated answer
>>I think your arguments are flawed
--Such?
>>of the subject matter you wish to debate
--You are the one debating here, not me. You haven't present any reasonably debatable points to debate.
Regards.
HushAndLearn 7 months ago
@sfeltmate -Was that an argument against mine? Because that wasn't a scientific argument at all. Go ahead and believe matter have intelligence in and of itself and make your own fairy tale.
I don't think is very critical argument by sending me to read such and such books when you cant even defend your points.
You are just asking me to read more ignorant statements from other people. You are the one arguing here, not them. So you are the one to suppose to defend your points, not them.
Regards.
HushAndLearn 7 months ago
@sfeltmate -So you believe a dictionary can exist by throwing ink to the air? Matter in and of itself doesn't know what is adaptable and what is not. How can you speak about the DNA code and ignoring the word code?
Your own body design yell out a creator by the complexity of your own body mechanism. You have the evidence of God in front of your own eyes and still didn't even notice it? You must be kidding.
About who is He, just look at the source, not just the believe ignoring the source.
HushAndLearn 7 months ago
@sfeltmate I believe in God because He answers my questions when I ask Him something, in a way that I can understand. Why don't you ask Him to reveal to you His existence? He's a Person. He listens. He answers. Ask Him for the evidence, and listen for His reply.
HeisLord9876 7 months ago
@sfeltmate I guess I'd say that the world around us is the primary evidence of the existence of God: the beauty and design of nature, things big like the Milky Way, and things small, such a spider's web. I honestly don't understand how anyone could NOT see the hand of God in something like the intricacy and intelligence behind the engineering of a spider web's design, and the impossibility of something with a brain the size of a pin prick to have somehow, by chance, designed it.
HeisLord9876 7 months ago
@sfeltmate >>It is your job - even according to your own holy book - to present credible evidence of your god's existence. You haven't done that.
--The fact of the matter is that life exist, and the fact of the matter is that you can't prove in any way how life came to be, so therefore that make you a believer. The difference is that I have logic, reason, eye witnesses, history on my side and you have none of that in your side.
A dictionary can't come to be by throwing ink in the air.
HushAndLearn 8 months ago
@sfeltmate >>Where on earth did you get the idea that "Atheists reject absolutes"?
--Science, since is not absolute
>>it is impossible to reject something that does not exist
--You are making an absolute statement, you don't know 100% of everything, therefore is not honest at all to make an statement like that
>>Atheists do not "reject God" but rather state that there is no evidence to support the existence of God
--Atheist DO reject God, life is evidence of a mind behind, not nothingness
HushAndLearn 8 months ago
@sfeltmate --Pretty easy, atheism is a self contradictory word. Atheists reject absolutes and yet they reject God absolutely o.0
HushAndLearn 8 months ago
2 people are in denial.
Omnipharious 8 months ago
1 Corinthians 1:25
Listen to this passage
1 Corinthians 1: 25 "Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men."
Pray that you enter not into temptation of the weak and ask that God will supply All your needs according to His Riches in Glory
Tomsjamb 10 months ago 9
I can't believe the amount of knowledge and wisdom in the man.
and he has no notes.
Omnipharious 10 months ago 41
@Omnipharious Too bad creationists don't understand logic !
gregrutz 6 months ago
@gregrutz
...(silence)...
The best answer for a fool.
Omnipharious 5 months ago
@Omnipharious He does not need notes because he repeats the same crap over and over.
And Fuck You is the best answer for a creatard.
gregrutz 5 months ago
@gregrutz is Fuck you supposed to mean something? I can see the expression of aggression, is indication of lack of intelligent argument. You sound like a child. you might be...
Anywho- the questions are the same, the answers should be the same. People ask the same questions.
You are clearly have not used your mind to - even a sub-par capacity. If you had, even a modicum (feel free to look the word up) of synapses.....
Omnipharious 5 months ago
@gregrutz CONT- this is stupid- You are blind. You believe that because you can't see- there is nothing to see- you deny the possibility of sight, and the evidence presented to you by those who can see. And you are wrong.To give truth to someone who loves it not is to only give him more multiplied reasons for misinterpretation. you have enough reasons. Don't you?
Omnipharious 5 months ago 4
@Omnipharious What evidence? Does this IDiot show any fossils? Geology?
The body is gone and that proves...........nothing. Not having evidence is not proof of anything.
gregrutz 5 months ago
@gregrutz @gregrutz I'LL BE HONEST WITH YOU- if you are truly looking for the truth, youtube is not the place for you. however, i'll refer you to one last video in good faith-
pHRP0I2SrVs
---
I truly wish you the best in your search, and that the God I believe in will reveal himself to you in a manner that you cannot deny. Take Care Greg.
Omnipharious 5 months ago
@gregrutz youtube.com/watch?v=pHRP0I2SrVs
Omnipharious 5 months ago
@Omnipharious Why would I watch the guy, he is full of crap.
gregrutz 5 months ago
oh! found it!
Thanks.
Omnipharious 10 months ago
thank you for posting this , so enlightening and logical.
blessings to you
Patty4JesusChrist 11 months ago
was this @ NUS? when did ravi come here?
sadathusain 11 months ago
Comment removed
JasonQuahWL 1 year ago
Wow, amazing
donovanrules123123 1 year ago
Awesome! :D
mrm64 1 year ago
Excellent piece of work!! Thank you very much for Sharing!!!!!
What a way of meeting people and get to see their talent. At first was reluctant being on youtube, but getting to do this has brought me into the houses of some very special people. You are one of them. Life; isn't it wonderful!!! Keep up the good work. Hope You Are Having A Splendid Day!!!!
A New Friend
Erick
erickdircks 1 year ago
@erickdircks
Hi,and thanks for the way you have written ,i am a christian and really like the way Dr.Ravi talks
i too, wish you happiness,real love ,kindness and all the good things in life
may God bless you xx
lolaponse 11 months ago
Dr R. Z. what an excellent illustration of the water pump as a comparison to The Saving Grace of Christ.
For His Glory!!
forhisglory700 1 year ago
Both of you are wrong. Science is all fake and a conspiracy. Christianity is also all fake and stupid.
MY God is a flying spaghetti monster. Yes, it is a real God and he did create the universe. He also wrote a memoir, which depicted everything that happened. In it, he says that everything we currently see and know is a mirage - an illusion.
We won't find out the truth until we kill ourselves. So Christianity is a big lie. The only thing that makes sense is my God.
Also, there is no gravity.
MegaCrazyTaxiDriver 1 year ago
@MegaCrazyTaxiDriver >>Yes, it is a real God and he did create the universe
--You have no historical background to support such claim, and as if you search for it you'll find it as a parody of religion, so game over. For Christianity there is no such parody nor false claims accounts to be know, quite opposite, it is a well support it accounts, that you not only find in the Bible but also outside of it too.
HushAndLearn 1 year ago
@HushAndLearn: "You have no historical background to support such claim".
Oh but I do. It says so in the book. His Noodly Appendage visits me in my visions, I SAW Him... in his full noodly goodness.
And since everything we know (except the Flying Spaghetti Monster) is a delusion, that makes Christianity and Science a delusion. Logic, man, logic.. Oh, and game over.
"you not only find in the Bible but also outside of it too."
Oh I find spaghetti all over the place, not just in Bible!
Ramen!
MegaCrazyTaxiDriver 1 year ago
@MegaCrazyTaxiDriver >>Oh but I do. It says so in the book
--Only by the group of people not been able to give their life for a joke they know to be
>>Appendage visits me in my visions, I SAW Him... in his full noodly goodness
--Curiously, there are no serious medical backgrounds that indicate any death experience as for video I have
>>Oh I find spaghetti all over the place, not just in Bible!
--Your FSM won't seriously stand historically anywhere as simple as that, Game Over :)
HushAndLearn 1 year ago
@HushAndLearn "not been able to give their life for a joke"
Yeah, they couldn't give their life to a joke that Christianity is. That's why they believe in FSM.
"there are no serious medical backgrounds that indicate any death experience"
Are you trying to use science and medicine in your argument? Science is fake. Check and mate.
"FSM won't seriously stand historically anywhere"
Historically? History is fake and illusion. FSM is the truth. Why? Book said so.
Game over.
MegaCrazyTaxiDriver 1 year ago
@MegaCrazyTaxiDriver >>Are you trying to use science and medicine in your argument? Science is fake.
--It seems that you are also claiming that we are not here at all, right ;) right ;)
>>Historically? History is fake and illusion. FSM is the truth. Why? Book said so
--Yea, your book but no the evidence ^^
>>Game over.
--Yea, game over :))))))
HushAndLearn 1 year ago
@HushAndLearn "It seems that you are also claiming that we are not here at all"
No, we are here. But "here" is not what we think it is. We are in a delusion, like a dream. Science is all fake, Christianity is all fake, FSM is the truth.
"Yea, your book but no the evidence"
Evidence? Pasta is everywhere in our lives. FSM is omnipresent, you're just blind not to see him in your heart, in your sould. You are deaf enough not to hear his teachings. Evidence? We are here, that's the evidence.
MegaCrazyTaxiDriver 1 year ago
@MegaCrazyTaxiDriver >>No, we are here. But "here" is not what we think it is. We are in a delusion, like a dream. Science is all fake, Christianity is all fake, FSM is the truth.
--Rotfl, jajajajaa, you have such a sense of humor. Don't worry, I do get your sarcasm.
>>Evidence? We are here, that's the evidence
--Ok then, let see how many people die for your lie.
Anyway, can you tell me if your FSM is evil, good or does it depends on our deeds to go to him?
HushAndLearn 1 year ago
@HushAndLearn: "Rotfl, jajajajaa, you have such a sense of humor."
Can't accept the truth? I know, logic hurts.
"Ok then, let see how many people die for your lie."
Not a lie, it's the truth. What does it matter how many people die for it?
"FSM is evil, good or does it depends on our deeds to go to him?"
FSM lies outside of boundaries of our primitive logic, so we can't categorize him as "good" or "evil". Follow His teachings and you shall be with Him. Otherwise, burn in Pasta Hell.
MegaCrazyTaxiDriver 1 year ago
@MegaCrazyTaxiDriver >>I know, logic hurts.
--Yea, mostly if is like yours, lol
>>Not a lie, it's the truth. What does it matter how many people die for it?
--Because that show how reliable it is
>>FSM lies outside of boundaries of our primitive logic, so we can't categorize him as "good" or "evil"
--Bingo, that's why your FSM is not logically consistent because creation must contain love because love create and preserves, hate kills and destroys, so your FSM fall on its face by itself
HushAndLearn 1 year ago
@HushAndLearn:"Yea, mostly if is like yours, lol"
--Logic is logic, it doesn't belong to anyone. Logic hurts you, because you are not smart enough for it.
"Because that show how reliable it is"
--Islam is the most reliable religion then, most people are dying for it nowadays. Why don't you go and die for Christianity?
"creation must contain love because love create and preserves"
--FSM never killed a single person.
"hate kills and destroys"
--Christian God killed many people.
Game over.
MegaCrazyTaxiDriver 1 year ago
@MegaCrazyTaxiDriver >>Logic is logic, it doesn't belong to anyone. Logic hurts u, because you are not smart enough for it
--Lol yea. I guess ^^
>>Islam is the most reliable religion then, most people r dying for it nowadays
--One thing is die for something you believe (Islam) and another thing is die for something you witness (Christianity) which is the case from the apostles.
>>FSM never killed a single person
--Jesus neither, Jesus is good, on your own word FSM is not good so game over
HushAndLearn 1 year ago
@HushAndLearn: "Believing vs Witnessing"
Witnessing is just believing that what you saw is the truth, like science. It's still a belief.
Islam has more people dying for it, period.
Why don't you go and die for Christianity?
"Jesus neither"
Yeah, but CHRISTIAN GOD KILLED THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE.
FSM DIDN'T KILL A SINGLE PERSON.
Game over.
"on your own word FSM is not good"
Never said he is not good. Learn to read. You asked me to classify something that is unclassifiable. It's not possible.
MegaCrazyTaxiDriver 1 year ago
@MegaCrazyTaxiDriver >>Witnessing is just believing that what you saw is the truth, like science
--Agree
>>Islam has more people dying for it
--Yes, for a believe, not for eye witness accounts
>>Why don't you go and die for Christianity?
--I do, but Jesus told us to love our enemies. Not judge and don't kill
>>Yeah, but CHRISTIAN GOD KILLED THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE
--Yea, is like saying is your fault for the 9/11 attacks
>>FSM DIDN'T KILL
--It does kill people spirituality which is worst
HushAndLearn 1 year ago
@HushAndLearn: You say "Agree" that witnessing = belief but then you say again that "for a believe, not for eye witness accounts".
Why constantly contradict yourself? Both religions have people dying for their beliefs in it. Islam has more though. So it's more reliable by your logic.
"Yea"
Exactly. Christian God killed. And HATE is what kills and destroys. Christian God has hate == bad, by your logic".
Game over.
"It does kill people spirituality"
Nope. FSM saves spirituality.
MegaCrazyTaxiDriver 1 year ago
@MegaCrazyTaxiDriver >>You say "Agree" that witnessing = belief but then you say again that "for a believe, not for eye witness accounts".
--Islam rely on believes without witnesses but what in Muhammad said without any miracle support of any kind. Jesus did so many miracles and He resurrect from death with so many eye witnesses accounts that even the year start counting from around His departure.
HushAndLearn 1 year ago
@HushAndLearn: "Islam rely on believes".
And Christianity relies on beliefs that everything Bible said about eyewitnesses is truth. Saying there were eyewitnesses == nothing but a belief. Both are beliefs.
Dying for eyewitnessing = dying for belief. Simple as that. The same thing, just like science. Use logic. If two things are equal, dying for both of them is equal.
Once again, Islam has more people dying for it. So it's more reliable!
MegaCrazyTaxiDriver 1 year ago
@MegaCrazyTaxiDriver >>And Christianity relies on beliefs that everything Bible said about eyewitnesses is truth
--It is history keep through generations, both historical accounts it is mentioned. Islam make no difference with Mormons for their prophet, Joseph Smith nor Muhammad did miracles nor spoke to God.
>>Dying for eyewitnessing = dying for belief
--A believe for what many different sources say and match through all those different sources from a fisherman through a king.
HushAndLearn 1 year ago
@HushAndLearn: "It is history keep through generations"
Exactly, and history differs from mouth to mouth. You rely on pure belief that what you're told is truth. It's all a belief, both christianity and islam.
"A believe for what many different sources say and match through all those different sources from a fisherman through a king."
Just because many people believe in a lie doesn't make it become true. Christianity is a good example of it.
MegaCrazyTaxiDriver 1 year ago
@MegaCrazyTaxiDriver >>Exactly, and history differs from mouth to mouth
--With the difference that God is perfect and know how, who & when He should come and speak, to be capable to preserve His word through time perfectly because God know the future & as the scriptures said [John 15:16] You did not choose Me, but I chose you
>>It's all a belief, both christianity and islam
--I believe Muhammad exist but I also believe Muhammad was a liar for common sense and reason for many reasons
HushAndLearn 1 year ago
@HushAndLearn: "I believe Muhammad exist..."
Good for you. It's just a belief and nothing more. Both religions. Except Islam has more people dying. So it's more reliable. Bingo!
"With the difference that God is perfect"
With the difference that history differs from mouth to mouth.
MegaCrazyTaxiDriver 1 year ago
@MegaCrazyTaxiDriver >>Both religions. Except Islam has more people dying. So it's more reliable. Bingo!
--Dying for a lie,not for eye witnessing anything reliable, huge difference. Bingo
>>With the difference that history differs from mouth to mouth
--No when God knows the future and choose His people and prophets & time to do so ;)
HushAndLearn 1 year ago
@HushAndLearn: "Dying for a lie
Prove it's a lie.
",not for eye witnessing anything reliable, huge difference."
Not reliable, based on nothing but faith. Both religions are. Both are the same.
Check, and mate.
MegaCrazyTaxiDriver 1 year ago
@MegaCrazyTaxiDriver >>Prove it's a lie
--As soon as you prove it to be truth
>>Not reliable, based on nothing but faith. Both religions are. Both are the same. Check, and mate.
--Yea and your personal experiences on FSM neither. Base on nothing since you can't prove them to me, fatality ^^. Even worst because you have no personal evidence. O.O
HushAndLearn 1 year ago
@MegaCrazyTaxiDriver >>Just because many people believe in a lie doesn't make it become true
--But it does when it becomes through not only all these difference sources where they don't know each other, but also because of the evidence we see of some of the Biblical events described
>>Christianity is a good example of it
--Christianity is the only source of congruency, logic and reason. Original sin for example, that's the only way to explain why God separate from us and why do we have to die
HushAndLearn 1 year ago
@HushAndLearn: "they don't know each other"
prove it.
"Christianity is the only source of congruency, logic and reason"
Nope. FSM is the truth, everything else is fake.
"God separate from us"
Nope. FSM is the only God. He's not separate from us. I see him every day in my plate. Checkmate.
MegaCrazyTaxiDriver 1 year ago
@MegaCrazyTaxiDriver >>prove it.
--Do you love your family? Yes or not? Prove it?
>>Nope. FSM is the truth, everything else is fake
--Then you don't exist.
>>Nope. FSM is the only God. He's not separate from us. I see him every day in my plate. Checkmate.
--I haven't see him, so yea, checkmate
HushAndLearn 1 year ago
@HushAndLearn: "Do you love your family? Yes or not? Prove it?"
I can't. I guess just like you can't prove they didn't know each other. And yet you base everything off of it. Game over.
"I haven't see him"
Nobody cares about you. Many people constantly see Him, including me. It is sad that people like you never enjoyed the glory of Pasta on their plates. It's still there and exists. Evidence, logic.
MegaCrazyTaxiDriver 1 year ago