10 Questions One Intelligent Christian Has Answered

[ChipArgyle]

What is the point of a video you have to read? Email us next time.

[ablestmage]

@ChipArgyle - Email who, everyone who is looking for a response?

[ChipArgyle]

@ablestmage I was commenting on the inappropriateness of the medium. It's just plain silly to make a video that is full of gobs of printed text. It's tantamount to sending Morse code over the radio.

[ablestmage]

@ChipArgyle - As an FCC-licensed radio operator, I can assure you radio is a perfectly normal and common medium to send Morse code. Further, I think your argument is a bit ad-hominem, by refusing to examine the actual arguments and bickering over the style. You can reply to it in the same manner as if it were in email, both of which require reading.

[ChipArgyle]

@ablestmage I'll leave ad hominem attacks to others.

At least I don't have to keep pausing email messages to read them.

[ablestmage]

@ChipArgyle - Please leave all future comments in triplicate, only in purple mimeograph copies (keeping the original for your records), and translated into the Cyrillic language I'm thinking of at the moment I receive it..

[ablestmage]

@AKBadBoy911 - Interesting suggestion, considering you didn't even read the text provided. It is actually from a critical standpoint, had you actually read it. Which parts in particular did you find characteristic of the "god said it, believe it, that settles it" angle, in the two minutes that your valuable time was subjected to? =P

[TopazSkillMauler]

trolloolololololololololloolol­ololololololoolloololololololo­lolololloololol

[ranchai100]

your analogy about asking god for things is flawed.The bible states in another passage ask anything i jesus name and you shall receive it if you truly believe.It doesnt say you might get it,it say you will get it.as a former christian of 23 years I can tell you this is bogus.Also,if I accidently cut myself and it heals does that count as a miracle?of course not,just as a person with cancer who goes through chemo and goes into remission isnt a miracle.Its from medical technology

[boshtalk]

Oy! I can't better correct your drivel than has been established below (ksmartialarts for starters, that you answer none despite the title).

Starting from the beginning, trying to discount a sample-size of 1,100 surveys. Providing it is fairly random, then this is a perfectly acceptable sample size. Especially from MD's who are more-than-likely reliable responders to research initiatives. If you're so ignorant of statistical significance then don't comment on it.

[ablestmage]

@boshtalk - US Census data that counts doctors in the US suggests there are about 14,230 doctors per 100,000 population. Given the US had a population of 307m in 2009, 14,230 x 3070 = 4,686,100 doctors in the US (give or take). 1100 doctors responding is a sample size of roughly .02347 percent. So one random doctor is a valid sample of what every 4,261 doctors think?

[boshtalk]

@ablestmage - I can't teach you Stats101 in under 500 characters. But, no, 1 survey is not a good sample size, but 1,100 is damned good for determining results for the population. ie. flipping a coin once isn't a good indicator of whether you'll get heads or tails....but how many times will you need to flip it before you can reasonably assume that there's a 50% chance of one or the other? 20 or 30 and you'd probably be willing to bet on the 50% chance. Make sense?

[boshtalk]

@ablestmage so, with the doctors, after you've asked 50 or 60 of them the same question, and you keep getting similar answers for a solid percentage of them...and then do another 50 or 60 and you get near the same percentage...then by the time you get to 1,100 the odds are that you're going to be "confident" that you will get almost the same answers from a similar random sample of 1,100 doctors. I haven't seen the study, but I'm sure that the confidence level selected was probably 95%.

[User1230456]

Nice to meet a Christian- funny how in the comments it seems all the nonbelievers are assaulting and agressive while you're reasonable and calm; why are you guys so offended by the thought of God if you deny his existence anyway? Could it be because deep down you doubt your own belief in there being no God?

[boshtalk]

@User1230456 - I can't speak for everyone, but probably the frustration of non-believers with the damage caused by any promotion of highly improbable, scientifically unsound idea of something being absolute. If I told you that since there are literally hundreds of millions of cats, that there's probably at lest one of them that can talk. You'd tell me I was an idiot. If I told you that there could be a miraculously talking cat out there somewhere...would you give it a second thought?

[ksmartialarts]

I'm not sure what you are thinking was "evidence" of anything. But I'm saying exactly what I said...

You presented your video as having answers to the 10 Questions (not that I was holding my breath, due to experience with people like yourself). Your video was not presented as "ignoring the 10 questions to offer stuff about my other beliefs instead and pretend I'm offering evidence of something."

A claim was made, as usual (even in your title).

The claim was bunk, as usual.

[ablestmage]

@ksmartialarts - yes, but all you have is a flat statement of disagreement, there is no substance to your objection, as you've offer no specific counterarguments against the arguments I've made in response. You've basically suggested, "apples are actually bananas" without providing anything to back it up. It's just a flat statement, with no merit.

[ksmartialarts]

I don't see answers to those very basic, simple questions. I DO see the same sort of typical excuses as to why you don't need to answer them or why they don't count, etc.

I don't see any real demonstration of intelligence, or the education you claimed to have had, along with the claim of answers to the questions.

Isn't it odd...when it comes to Bronze Age superstitions... that the one you were born to (statistically speaking) just happens to be the "right" one?

Try thought over fear.

[ablestmage]

@ksmartialarts - Are you suggesting that, since a simple answer wasn't given to a simple question, it therefore doesn't count as evidence? What qualifiers do you demand before something is considered evidence? I don't see any justifiable objection in your remarks.

[fsb2cool2care]

Good effort ablestmage. However as Acts 18:26 mentions how Aquila and Priscilla expounded the way of God more correctly to Apollos, I would like to offer you some suggestions.

First, I think you would find it helpful to understand better why God has allowed all the suffering in the world.

Second, it is helpful to know that NOT all non-Christ individuals face eternal torment in hellfire, and the soul is not immortal. The soul can die as Eze. 18:4 and other texts show.

[ablestmage]

@fsb2cool2care - God "allowing" suffering carries with it a peculiar subjectivity, as if throwing a rock up in the air and it hitting me on the head has been "allowed" by God and not merely a natural consequence.

Please offer the other references indicating souls can die. All of the commentaries I find on Ez.18:4 reflect nothing regarding "soul" except as to mean "person" -- and it certainly would be addressed if it were that pivotal of a matter, I suspect.

[lprevolt]

Part 2 of my post - I think he did well in addressing issues - I think GOD (AKA Religion) is made up to control & comfort (some) "ignorant" Masses (remember very few could read until 100 years ago) Now we are a more informed lot & don't need to cross our fingers or hope for pots o' gold anymore. Today's religion's role in America? to control & brokerage power of ideology in local & world affairs via 1's own religious beliefs - which is why we have Christian vs Islam jihad today - 9-11 ain't it

[ablestmage]

@lprevolt - I think something that is desperately needed in anti-religious sentiment, is the ability to differentiate between the actual statements of the text and the personality traits of the person teaching it. If the speaker is a conniving, mean-spirited jerk, the scripture may appears so. It is almost consistently the jerk-minded presentations that are so aptly attacked, I think.

[lprevolt]

I notice ya only complain about how the video "10 questions" goes about proclaiming in the now-a-days sound bite world that the item does meet you requirements... THAT DOESN'T ANSWER any of the BS that GOD AND RELIGIOUS HEATHENS (pope, preachers, etc.) have heaped upon the masses for millenniums VIA a big thick propagandized book. I could have had more respect for you if you had answered some of the questions rather then attack the methods in which they were asked.

[ablestmage]

@lprevolt - Well, the video IS a specific response to the WWGHA video, so naturally it would address such things. Ask me a question regarding such purportedly BS subjects, and I will try to answer it.

[Foxstab]

No, I do not. That would be bother towards a cause which I already have explained to be moot.

Religion is a tool in the hands of the savvy to easily enslave, control, direct crowds of weaker conviction.

I don't expect religious people to "wake up" any more than I expect them to develop tolerance towards that which is not religious, contradicts it or speak negatively of it.

I have nothing more to say on the matter.

IT IS A MOOT POINT.

[ablestmage]

@Foxstab - It's a moot point for you, perhaps. On the other hand, taking the stance of blanket religious opposition could just as easily be a tool of the feeble-minded to grant themselves a self-edifying sense of being free-thinkers in a misguided impression that pressures-to-conform patterns are widespread. No religion tells you how to think. Every religious person you've ever encountered is his own free thinker, and involves himself deliberately, not by patterns of control or bending of will.

[lprevolt]

I had long post - I'll cut to the chase: God gave man free will (a loop hole for GODers against logic in debates) But even with "free will vs God's will" QUESTION: why would God let 6 Million+ of his "choosen People" Die in a Nazi Holocaust? How else can explain it other than "No God"? Isn't that Enough to prove there IS no God? Just random events? And I swear I'll have you booted off YouTube if you say anything anti-Semitic! There is no way "that" can be a part of "God's will".

[lprevolt]

I love Jewish people & I think everyone have a right to believe (when it doesn't hurt others!) I think WWGHA has a right to his beliefs. What I hate most in GOD debates is that those who don't agree with Christian ways (different or none) must be put to death for that? No wonder the infantile Holy WARS. (I'm not excusing Muslims totally, but they have a right to defend themselves when people invade their land) I love those bumper stickers with Coexist made out of religious symbols

[ablestmage]

@lprevolt - RE 6million dead -- I already answered that, Q#2 (00:54) as scripture repeatedly emphasizes (in both testaments) that your livelihood is not the point. Man's concern is largely to stay alive and to avoid pain, and that is inherently self-centered, but all of us share it. God's concern, however, is something worse than death, and people whose views are too obstructed by the "avoid pain and death of self" issue can't see it, and perhaps not on purpose.

[lprevolt]

Quick one: I'd want to know how "Good Christians" are supposed to Stone our Non-Virginal Wives according to the Bible now-a-days with all the Murder and Bigamy laws on the Court Books? Maybe with Pot if the groom is gay and has some STDs??? The Bible truly is for the ignorant. God (if there is one) is flawed because Man is flawed, and man wrote the Bible. Dispute this: I AM and You can't Prove me wrong because I won't perform for You. You can kill me, But Jesus died & therefore we ARE. - logic.

[ablestmage]

@lprevolt RE Good Christians - The book of Romans explains how the previous Hebrew code is now no longer an issue of disobey and be condemned. Besides, those who did disobey would have their disobedience atoned for in a yearly sacrifice. Christ however, is the one permanent sacrifice necessary. I'm not even sure what you're rambling on about for the rest of it. I already said the bible is man-made (01:23)..

[lprevolt]

Don't take my rantings personal. As followers of Christ go... I think you are a pretty good fellow. I just find the whole concept of God so mystical. The very same people who say there are NO Ghosts, will turn around and say there's a God. When we as people didn't know why it rained... that was when we needed a God. As a species, some of us have matured past that belief system. Unfortunately we give up immortality for the reliability of science. All the Best to believers of God, if it helps.

[computeriac]

what the hell are you all talking about?? Karsten Koch - Blue valley !! Long live the UPLINK !!! :P

[Foxstab]

Religion is irrational. It is self-contained, self-excusing, self-evident, self-everything. Anything beyond that point is moot as it becomes a deafs' argument.

Uplink rules. Future Crew rules. Demo Scene rules. Introversion rules. Kastren Koch rules.

RiSE iN SUPERiOR COURiERiNG!

[ablestmage]

@Foxstab - the self-everything nature you describe could be used to describe every particle in the universe. Could you be a pinch more specific?

[Soder96]

Great vid. I had been thinking about all of these answers, but I didn't know how to put them onto paper. Also, I had watched this video a couple days ago, and had distinctly remembered the music from somewhere, then today I booted up my old game Uplink: Hacker Elite and this song was the menu theme :P

[ablestmage]

Didn't know it was ever in a game.. I'll have to look that up! I got it from back in the BBS days prior to the widespread popularity of the Internet ^_^

[MaicahRu]

strawman strawman strawman

[ablestmage]

Isn't doing nothing but accusing strawman, itself, oversimplifying -- instead of genuinely responding? Nice.

[Bumdeagle]

I was watching this in the hopes that he was going to answer the questions. I am sorely disappointed.

+1 for research, something rare on the tube

-1 for failure to give answers to the questions

{

Why does bible say yay for slaves The bible says treat your slaves well.

}

[ablestmage]

The second statement is a correction of the first. The first statement asks a non-question -- it doesn't say yay for slaves.

[rudolfbyker]

I think the questions have been more than answered! Thanks.

[lprevolt]

I'd want to know how "Good Christians" are supposed to Stone our Non-Virginal Wives according to the Bible now-a-days with all the Murder and Bigamy laws on the Books? I guess with Pot if the groom is gay?

[TheUnquestionable0]

You say why would an amputee pray for their limb back. This is obviously because common sence tells us it wont work. Biologically a human limb can not regenerate on its own. But, from a religious persective why not pray. If there is an all powerful, all knowing being who loves you so much he would die for you, why wont he do this? Granted he never done it in the bible, but why is that? Jesus did heal the blind though, so why is it if a blind person prays they are not healed.

[ablestmage]

It seems you're still relying squarely on the "genie" idea -- that "if pray, receive miracle" will always work if God really loves me. Being all-powerful comes with other powers too -- such as helping you realize just how badly you don't need your ever-loving wishes granted. To say that, "anyone could realize that without even praying for it" doesn't add or subtract any evidence. I could equally retort, "A person could pray and receive that," and the damage would be equally puny.

[xMADD1x]

Ok, your answer to the 1st question has absolutely nothing to do with "god". Anyone could get those results without prayer. also your analogy makes absolutely no sense. Also, what are the reasonable explanations to #1? You state they exist, so I'd love to hear them.

How is #2 an open ended, disengenuous question? What murky context are you talking about? Also, what about the children who DIE?

I'd love a response to EVERYTHING that I brought up if you are up to it.

[ablestmage]

(a) the reasonable explanations are on the science side, not the spiritual side (as you said, can occur to non-praying individuals). As I said, the proper "answer" to a prayer for a miracle is not necessarily a miracle. I'm not sure what else you're asking. What analogy?

(b) The question is loaded because of an implication that God is a child-feeder. God does not feed children. People feed children. To suggest that God isn't real because of children starving is absurd.

[xMADD1x]

Well, if you admit that there has never been spontaneous regeneration and there didn't have to be, then WHY PRAY?

Next, I'm reffering to your comparison between calling your mother and praying to god.

Finally, "god loves everyone." Do you not take that position? If you do then how come he allows them to starve. If you don't then explain why you or anyone else should care about god if he might not give a crap about you/them?

[ablestmage]

(a) That's my question exactly -- the idea that someone actually does pray for spontaneous limb regeneration is rather absurd. No Christian I've ever known would even consider that.

(b) I'm not sure how that's confusing -- you're not asking anything specific. What in particular doesn't make sense? Do you suspect God is obligated to answer a prayer made to a God you've invented? vs. Do you expect your mother to answer you, if you dial the wrong number?

[ablestmage]

(c) If you love your mother, and someone kills your mother, does that mean you don't love her? Children dying of starvation because of the man not doing his job to feed them doesn't have anything to do with God not loving.

[xMADD1x]

(a) Well if thats your exact question, allow me to give the answer:

There is absolutely no point in prayer.

(b) If thats what you were trying to say, then you need to put the word "not" when describing that the god made regeneration an option. Also that your god does not heal people's limbs.

(c) What man are you talking about? What the hell dude? Extreme poverty in a desolate area is not "a man not doing his job".

BTW: You need to stop making analogies, they are terrible.

[ablestmage]

(a) What you see as a pointless exercise is what many Christians will agree with. Not all Christians pray, even about things some of the nuts will pray about. I'd even hazard to guess that most Christian don't except when being led by a leader in church in a group. Your criticism doesn't uproot Christianity, it finds similarity with what many Christians suspect. And believing that prayer is powerful is not a required belief. Disbelief in prayer doesn't somehow make you hellbound.

[ablestmage]

(b) I didn't say anything about God healing peoples' limbs or that it was an option. WWGHA said that, and I refuted it.

(c) It most certainly is. If you are a father, is it not your responsibility to make sure your children are fed? Does not every child have a father? Is it not your job to not-kill people? If you kill people, are you preventing fathers from feeding their children? Man is the primary source of his own undoing, and has no ground to blame God for it, except as a cheap cop-out.

[xMADD1x]

I'm goin to address point c before the rest.

No, many of the starving people in these countries do not have fathers, at least not ones who are in a position to help. You also can't use the "they should have put their children before themself" arguement because had they done that, they would end up dead and unable to help anyway.

Finally, if your god doesn't heal amputees, then what miracles does he perform and if prayer is unrelated, why do they happen?

[ablestmage]

Part of the decision for childbearing in the first place is based on whether you can maintain that life. Knowing that one cannot support children and bearing them anyway is irresponsibility. Everyone has a father.

There's not a repertoire, as if you can pick one and pray for that one, and have a percentage chance of getting it. There's no clear formula -- he does as he pleases, but ultimately, he's done what's really necessary already. Everything else is just temporary.

[Soder96]

Analogies are best to help people to understand. Jesus regularly used parables to illustrate an important principal. God gave us our own free will. In Genesis it CLEARLY states that he gives man reign over all of the Earth, and poverty is nothing less than a man-made affliction caused by somewhere someone not doing their job. Have you ever heard of the butterfly effect? The Earth operates like this, and as such, every action you can preform has a rebuttal. It's Newton's 3rd law in psychology :)

[Soder96]

We are given free will to pray. Personally, I think it is more than acceptable to talk to someone I owe my life to, which leads me to another item: to pray in a Christian sense is not to ask for a service. It is TALKING to God. Thanking him for another day, another chance to do something great.

(b) I think it was pretty clear in saying that God will not come and give you a cookie every time you ask. God doesn't owe you anything, but he still does things for us. Things that MATTER. (cont.)

[Soder96]

Amputees are able to do pretty much everything a normal human can do, so it isn't really necessary to "giv me mah arm back pl0x, lol" (final)

[dixitstiglitz]

what period of repentance is offered to those who commit these sins before they are put to death? if none, then these people face eternal damnation, which is exactly what they would have otherwise faced.

as an aside, how do Christians reconcile the fact that they aren't prepared to carry out the word of God as cited in these scriptures? (not rhetorical, please answer) are you not knowingly sinning in this case? and does that not invalidate one's repentance?

[ablestmage]

All non-Christ individuals face eternal damnation, though I am not certain at what point sins are actually counted (such as for infants or otherwise mentally inhibited), but I would presume (purely as a guess) that would be at a case-by-case matter, given that each were given a legitimate opportunity -- in fairness.

I suspect that the torment aspect being eternal is merely an inference given that the fires themselves are eternal.

[ablestmage]

One is granted life by grace (receiving when not earned) and mercy (not receiving what actually earned), not on the basis of repentance, performing a rite (baptism, etc) or any deed-doing. Life therefore is undefinable by any action on behalf of the granted. We're called to obey on a basis of appreciation and thanks, rather than out of requirement.

[dixitstiglitz]

but one is granted life after death not by grace or mercy, but by acceptance of and repentance to Jesus Christ in this life.

because of this, life is solely definable by the actions of the granted.

you are required to obey, if you wish to receive God's gifts and everlasting life.

also, your suspicion in your first post differs greatly from most Christian doctrine.

[ablestmage]

One is granted heavenly citizenship ("life after death" evokes dozens of ideas), not on the basis of your own actions, but on the actions of God in response to repentance. Grace and mercy, cannot, by definition, be earned, and no non-Christ person can earn eternal life. Repentance does not earn eternal life as an exchange, whereas therefore grace/mercy might be counted to your credit.

Obedience is now no longer a requirement, because there is no hell-consequence if you are in Christ.

[ablestmage]

as for the eternal torment idea -- where does it come from, then? the fires are eternal, yes, and there will be weeping/gnashing, etc. I do not find that it states the weeping/etc will be eternal.

[dixitstiglitz]

so the experience of hell is finite?

Matthew 25:46 says that those who are not covered by the sacrifice of Jesus Christ will be punished eternally. "And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal."

[ablestmage]

It doesn't seem possible to say for or against, from that verse. Loss of a limb, as WWGHA notes, is a permanent matter. There may have been weeping at the point of being severed, but simply an absent limb is not painful, per se, although still permanent.

I find it remarkably presumptuous to make a blanket statement that the torment is eternal, when perfectly reasonable doubt to the contrary plainly exists.

[dixitstiglitz]

How is it remarkably presumptuous? The bible has many references to eternal fires and the verse I quoted could quite easily mean eternal torment. Whether something is a remarkable presumption or not is clearly a subjective matter however I find it quite absurd that you think this to be one.

Your limb analogy brings nothing to your argument. If the limb has been served, the torment and psychological trauma could be permanent.

[ablestmage]

It is presumptuous because it seemingly arbitrarily decides one of the possibilities to be true, without being able to test it. I'm saying that the eternality of the torment is in doubt, not the eternality of the fires. If it's in doubt, it is neither one way or another -- but a mystery.

A psychological torment is something from which one can recover largely by the will, as there is no further physical pain.

[dixitstiglitz]

um... as for the robots argument in response to the why does God condemn certain people to death question:

this analogy is inaccurate as the inventor's emotional relationship with the robots is not specified. the Christian God on the other hand, loves each and every human. your point remains, however, God may incite this destruction as a precaution. but is this not inconsistent with the very notion of love? and what of forgiveness, which is often used as a qualifier of this love?

[ablestmage]

I think you'll find all analogies, ever, tend to break down once subtleties are brought up ^_^

I don't especially equate death with destruction, as it can be granted or removed at his word (as with deactivation in the analogy).

I think forgiveness in the real case is less a sense of overlooking misdeed and more uprooting the sin/forgiveness formula itself, as in:

-- Will you forgive me?

-- Forgive you of what?

[dixitstiglitz]

does this not make the other question i mentioned in my second post even more of a serious matter?

presuming repentance cannot be done as an ex ante measure, would a Christian, who had been devout but at their time of death had a sin (perhaps a lie, told to protect the feelings over others) that they had not repented for, be damned?

[ablestmage]

you are repenting of sinn*ing* not an itemized list of specifics.

[dixitstiglitz]

but is sin is still there, the formula has not been uprooted. if any sin remains, you are not right with God.

[ablestmage]

Sin is only there if you are using the previous formula. If you are convinced there is still a system of sin, you are opting to re-shackle yourself apart of the mercy you've been granted.

[dixitstiglitz]

this thread is getting very messy!

OK, I think I understand now. Wikipedia puts it as, " people are called upon to repent in order that we may feel our own inability to do so, and consequently be thrown upon God and petition Him to perform this work of grace in our hearts"

That clarifies it for me.

As someone who was raised in and attended church for 18 years, I'm really struggling with my new found skepticism. I'm also unhappy that I have never before been corrected on this misconception.

[tbonedano]

Excellent work. I've found the nonsense at WWGHA absolutely absurd, especially when it is done under the aegis of "rational thought." I've spent some time there talking about prayer: the most obvious argument against their premise is that they seem to believe that prayer is a magic spell. Christ's example in the Garden is enough to disabuse anyone of this notion: may this cup pass, but thy will be done. His petition wasn't answered...but God's will was done.

[ablestmage]

Agreed -- good example. I've not bothered to try any WWGHA's forums, myself.

[fightclubgyz]

Very good.