You know, the Christians go on about how the Athiests claim that "Nothing created everything"... but their own argument is that: Nothing created God who created everything!!! Oh, yeah, because that makes TOTAL sense.
Read it. Unless, you find the members of the WND Superstore to be more knowledgeable on this topic than the scientific community, in which case, this argument is not worth having. I require the people I debate with to not be dogmatic and over-zealous to that degree.
When one looks at the universe through the scope of quantum physics, as opposed to classical physics, creating "something from nothing", is scientifically possible. Ray Comfort makes himself appear intelligent by stumping uninformed atheists about the creation of the universe. How about he has an intellectual debate with say, Hawkins, or another theoretical/quantum physicist. If the Big Bang was scientifically impossible, then why would the scientific community embrace it?
@jguth66 The Big Bang theory (more accurately referred to as the expanding universe theory) states that all of the matter still existed, just in a singularity.
Haha don’t know if I'm going to cry or laugh at he's logic. He's point is that everything has to be created from something (God). But that’s bringing us back to the old question, "who created God" and we are back in an endless circle.
Now the first guy did answer him. We don’t know. Because no one knows, yet. And say that god did it, now that’s just sad. Saying that something magical did it does not explain anything; just make it harder to understand. Prove nothing at al.
somehow i think, that if all the creationists and other believers out there, would just take a minute to actually try to understand their opponents argumentation, religion would die out in about one minute....
I'm sure a lot of people will find "Comfort" in this book but certainly not much else. How sleazy can you be, just playing stupid on the whole scientific rationale for life on earth? Your side of the argument is dumbed down so far that it's main point of attack is that nobody has any idea how life could exist without God? Oh, my. Well at least you got that Cameron guy before the Scientologist's did.
Oh my god, I'm converted! This has answered my question of where everything came from! Good thing I don't question where god came from b/c, boy howdy, that'd be stupid! God just always existed and needed absolutely no causation at all! I'm glad that my logic disproving atheist suddenly doesn't apply to what I believe!
its funny their making the argument something cant come from something but they'll jump on board of the argument that the shit god makes just pops out of thin air also, its the same damn argument.
In addition Evolutionists consistently brush aside a major problem with their theory, namely that we do not see an abundance of mutation failures which should be several times more numerous than successful adaptations. We should see millions of one eyed humans and apes, because an eye requires less energy for its brain power (than to run two eyes for example) and adds greatly to a mammal's viability. The fact is that things were engineered perfectly as they are, it is mutation which is the enemy
they were engineered so perfectly that 25% of the world's population needs glasses by the age of 25. And your comment about "so called transitional species to be absent betwen animal groups" (sic) shows that you do not understand the mechanic of the theory you reject. Please stop using the same old "eye argument" that's been refuted 1000 times. Come up with the flying horse or something.
... you say having one eye requires less brain power to run than 2 eyes. And that it adds viability to mammals. I dont even know where to begin explaining all the horrible misconceptions you demonstrate in that post.
Actually, human mutation probably occurs at a rate of about one mutation per 33 million nucleotides per generation. In the majority of cases, they are harmless.
The fact is that evolutionists cannot point to observable macroevolution because it doesnt exist. The Cambrian period is a perfect example of "bursts" of new species. In addition I suggest you look up problems with fossil layers and the fossils themselves. Fossils are frequently out of place by "millions of years" , there are vertical (or upside down) tree trunks in several stratus layers, and the millions of so called "transitional species" to be absent between animal groups.
lightwithoutlimit: are you familiar with Malgrem's work "Evidence for punctuated gradualism in the late Neogene Globorotalia tumida lineage of planktonic foraminifera." ? Give it a read. And learn about the actual process of evolution before repeating ad nauseum the pseudo debate of micro-macro distinction. You're right about one thing: it doesn't exist outside the fantasy world of space-daddy followers.
Richard Lenski, biologist at Michigan State has observed over twenty years 44,000 generations of E Coli bacteria. One population after 31,000 generations mutated and adapted a means to metabolize citrate, a nutrient E Coli normally can not make use of.
Testable,... observable... and repeatable."
Wow thats amazing...except that its still a bacteria. No ones questioning adaptation, youve once again attacked a straw man.
You disbelieve the supernatural and yet the supernatrual is an integral aspect of your existence. For example, you live on a ball that floats in an infinite universe of space and there is a ball of fire hanging outside of your window keeping you warm and alive. Sure we know all of the scientific principles that describe the functions of celestial bodies but the very facts of their magnificent existence is beyond the scope of some supernatural events depicted in Biblical history.
Atheists believe that the most intelligent being in this world -human being- was formed alone, without an intelligence in the process, just random mutations, natural selection and many many years. Thats nonsense.
99% is probably not an exact proportion. There are many scientifics (even not religious people) who don't believe in evolution, but, even if your figure is true... so what? If the majority believes a lie, that makes a lie true? That is called a "faulty appeal to authority" fallacy.
that's fine. i'll just go along with the overwhelming majority of scientists, and you can believe in your space daddy, or Fred the Benevolent Cosmic Muffin if it makes you feel any better.
Why don't you communicate with someone who is trying to have the same conversation you are trying to give. You have the wrong person my friend.
And everything from the above I tried to say politely and I'm sorry if I came across any other way. Also I'm not trying to change your beliefs and I have no intention to change what you believe or dont' believe in.
It's easy to see that you believe in God. You must just believe because someone told you about him, or maybe he has spoken to you. I don't know and I don't care.
I unfortunately haven't seen, heard, etc God and wonder of his existance.
I don't need to prove or disprove anything to you because I never made a statement to prove or disprove anything you keep takling to me about.
I'm not even trying to take sides here, but you just can't stop can you?
It's simple: An atheist proposes that there is no God because they don't have knowledge/proof that God exists, which could mean that God has never spoken to them, they have never seen God, etc etc. Theists believe in God just because and some believe in God b/c he has spoken to them or they have seen him, etc etc.
That's a tough question to answer, atheist or not. It's implying the answer is known to someone. Theists can easily say (because they don't know) that God must have created it because they can't explain it. That way they don't have to find evidence on their own when they can just say God did it. Where as an atheist who doensn't know the answer, just responds that they don't know.
Why are you bringing another topic to the discussion? I made a statement about an atheist who responds to a question they don't know as, "I don't know." and you bring up the theory of evolution. I'm not talking about theories, I'm talking about the unknown, which would be things not yet know without any type of scientific fact. To have a theory you must have something to back it up, else you would be a fool, right?
Actually by definition the atheist proposes that their is no God. As if they had foreknowledge to assert that conclusion. "A theory or belief that God does not exist" You are trying to prove a negative, the onus is on you to provide the evidence for God not existing.
Honestly? I mean you seem to be 1/2 way smart, but then you add something that is just ridiculous. Someone has fed you some crazy stuff over the years, haven't they?
I never said God does or doesn't exist. Show me where I said that? We are (I'm) talking about Theists and Atheists and you keep changing the subject.
The burden of proof is with you and YOUR flock. You are the ones that need to bring evidence in order for those, like me, that are skeptical. To follow anything that requires blind faith and love to a god that we need to fear is just plain wrong.
Who cares if people believe in God! It doesn't bother me! If people want to worship Matter or a Rock or even yet Science...Who Cares? I think there is some Politics here or maybe God is real and it bothers them? So Chill out you bunch of CRO-MAGNUMS and "LET IT BE" by the Beatles! Chill!!!
Looks like Caveman 73 is a little angry! I think he is still in Cro-magnon evolutionary stage! He must be a Latent Homosexual with Baby Killing tendacies?
Why are all you athiest so angry with Christianity! What is it about this Faith that bothers you? The anger astounds me? Maybe it's because all of you are homosexuals and like to murder little babies and because a faith like Christianity believes in Morality and has Values and you just want to live your hedonistic life denying God but in reality believe,but deny evidence so you can feel good when you screw another man in the ass and you all want Christians to except this disgusting life style.
you don't need faith to aknowldege evolution. you don't have to believe in it. can you possibly take 'belief' out of the equation, or are you too stuck up in your faith system? wow nef4442, you really put the anal in analyse.
"The unexamined life is not worth living" (Socrates).
Once you examine in what your atheist beliefs are truly rooted in. Then You will begin to understand that it requires more faith then most Christians presume to have.
There are 2.7 Billion people who presume to have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ. You presume that you can prove all 2.7 billion are wrong Because YOU know without a reasonable doubt that there is no God. Good luck with your new found faith in atheism bub!
it's "more faith THAN most. not then.i know it's hard for you. Well it's either 2.7 billion are wrong, (of course that number was inflated) or 1.2 muslims are wrong, or maybe it's the 1 million hindus. of course they cannot ALL be right. bub.
So weak.... Hey did you know the the church thought the earth was the center of the universe...... Sun rotated around the earth...... Earth was flat.... 4 corners of the earth ring a bell?
Wrong again caveman, when are you going to step out of the cavernous ignorance of unbelief and step into the light.
The reason why POLITICALLY minded Catholics decided to persecute the more devoutly Christian then his persecutors Copernicus, because they were concerned over political matters and not theological ones, in short, they were not reading their Bible.
Written over 2 and 1/2 millennia ago...(Isaiah 40:22) "It is He that sitteth upon the sphere of the earth."
This is Ray approaching random people on the street expecting them to all be scientists and expecting them to know where we came from. If we knew where we came from then surely we would also have found a cure for AIDS/HIV, Cancer etc. 200 years ago, humans were not even aware of most metals we have on todays periodical table. I am no scientist and do not claim to know where we come from. Just my two cents and no offence meant if any caused.
Ray is so full of shit, I've asked for these same questions and he's too chickenshit to ask me.
he ask questions in a way you look bad answering it. god didnt make shit and asshole your asshole book the bible said he made everything from nothing.
Oh please enlighten us with some of this cult talk. Are you a high school drop out or were you home schooled by the most brainwashed religious parents ever?
Don't bother answering.. I don't want to give your small mind a headache.
Read an excerpt from "The Myth of Religious Neutrality" by Robert A. Clouser. OR watch The Lennox Vs. Hitchens debate.
Christians have always been the greatest intellectuals and now true empiricism in Science is being suppressed by the cultists in academia who try to force feed minds the mythology for adults (evolution).
You once again show your utter stupidity and blindness to logic and reason.
How is it than that studies have shown that the higher the IQ or the higher the education a person has the less likely they are to believe in ANY religion or worship a god or gods?
Christians are not the greatest intelectuals, not even close.
Ok lets take the smartest atheist you dimwits have (Christopher Hitchens) and lets take a smart Christian (John Lennox) and put them together for a debate. The debate is called "Is God Great"
Watch what happens when the wisdom of the foolish goes up against a wise Christian in a debate. You can watch it for yourself.
Lennox makes Hitchens look like the bumbling fool that he is.
myth: A traditional, typically ancient story dealing with supernatural beings, ancestors, or heroes that serves as a fundamental type in the worldview of a people, as by explaining aspects of the natural world or delineating the psychology, customs, or ideals of society
the sad part is that ray comfort and others like him at least have an interest in telling their stories: they make money that way, selling the stories to gullible people. You, on the other hand...well you just fell for it lol
Who claimed one that CH was the most intelligent atheist? Two what does a debate prove? Oh I know... It means you won an argument. What it doesn't mean as that what you were arguing for is right or correct.
You are not very bright are you? This is basic debate 101... High School shit.
Mythology: The body of myths belonging to a culture. Myths are traditional stories about gods and heroes. They often account for the basic aspects of existence — explaining, for instance, how the Earth was created, why people have to die, or why the year is divided into seasons. Classical mythology — the myths of the ancient Greeks and Romans — has had an enormous influence on European and American culture.
What fucking evidence? A bullshit book written by halfwit shepherds? Wow! I am sold.. .Sign me up for some jebus juice.
Ray Comfort is a fucking joke! The man has no true knowledge on how biology or evolution. He twists and lies like the snake he is.
Influence in the amount of INFORMATION on how life grows and evolves. Hey tell me is a bat a bird? The bible thinks so. Boy that is some high IQ stuff huh?
Please explain where the faith is required. It's a scientific theory (which means it has been proven) that has never been shown in error for 150 years, is the backbone of all branches of biology and is the only guiding force behind the development od treatments against bacteria and germs (which means you personally should reject an antibiotics since they are created based on evolutionary theory). Besides that it has also been observed in a Lab using E Coli. I could go on if you like.
In 1942, Nobel Laureate Ernst Chain wrote that his discovery of penicillin (with Howard Florey and Alexander Fleming) and the development of bacterial resistance to that antibiotic owed nothing to Darwin's and Alfred Russel Wallace's evolutionary theories.
He added, "I'd rather believe in fairies then in evolution."
One person disagrees? Lol! how about millions in this country alone. It was illegal to teach evolution in this country just until recently. Well at least until the culture leaches began their great spiritual bleeding of the nation.
You didn't see religious nuts condemn any other sciencetific theories. Oh wait that not's true Eugenics Theory was banned for a little while until Darwinists proved how beneficial it could be for society!
You didn't see religious nuts condemn any other sciencetific theories
Yeah. they reject plate tectonics, radiometric dating, the big bang theory and some still believe in geocentricism. You certainly are an angry little asshole, aren't you!
prove tectonics, prove radio metric dating methods work, and when you build that time machine that travels back billions of years. Then maybe we can begin discussing big bangs.
As for a geocentricism, i think your stretching your self their bud.
Oh and Christians don't believe in bigfoot, UFO's, Lochness, monster, or yeti!
In the words of Ernst Boris Chains,
"I'd sooner believe in fairies, then in Evolution"
"when you build that time machine that travels back billions of years. Then maybe we can begin discussing big bangs. "
That's some grade a moronic ideas you have there! Build a time machine and prove isaac newton really existed. I think the universe is 3 days old and newton is part of the universes' "appearance of age"
The reason why I believe Isaac Newton existed is because there is enough historical evidence from eyewitness sources. And there are statues of him every where in Europe his grave is in Europe the fact that he held the title as the first Laucasian of Mathematics in Cambridge etc.etc.
For you to equate empirical history with historical mythology for adults shows what a true lemming you are. Hey I have a theory, with 0 evidence, Peter pan did it!
Actually Jesus Christ has more historical evidence that He existed than Isaac Newton does. The further you go back in history the worse it gets for you bub! So I would leave that one alone. lol!
There are more paintings let alone historical accounts of Jesus then there are written records of Isaac Newton. Or any other person in History.
If you took every scientist that ever lived and put all of their bio's together you wouldn't get as many recorded accounts as there are of Christ!
No, the bible isn't "historical evidence " of Jesus.
Outside the bible there are almost NO historical accounts of Jesus. There are historical accounts of CHRISTIANS but no historical accounts of Jesus outside the bible written during or shortly after his life . Nobody noticed!
Here are a few of the historical sources from the first century that have mentioned Jesus (during His lifetime).
Greco Roman Sources: Flavius Josephus, Tacitus, Suetonius, Pliny the Younger, Thallus, Julius Africanus,Lucian, Celsus, The Talmud, The Acts of Pilate,
Notice no other passage in "Antiquities" is considered fraudulent.
Jesus once said, The worldhates Me because I testify that its works are evil (John 7:7).
For you to say that tacitus, Suetonius, Pliny the Younger etc. etc. did not mention Jesus is pure fraudulence on your part.
For example,Tacitus writes, "Christus had undergone the death penalty in the reign of Tiberius, by sentence of the procurator Pontius Pilate" (Annals 15.44).
"For you to say that tacitus, Suetonius, Pliny the Younger etc. etc. did not mention Jesus is pure fraudulence on your part. "
NONE of those wrote about Jesus during his lifetime. IS WHAT I SAID. Which they did not. None of these people were contemparies of jesus or claimed to witness any of things mentioned in the bible. They simply rehashed what the Christians believed. If a historian mentioned Josphef smith is that evidence for the golden plates and the angel moroni?
Scholars agree that Peter (eyewitness) along with Mark (eyewitness) were in Rome in the early 60's (1Peter 5:13).
Historians like Tacitus and Pliny the Younger were writing History in the making "eyewitness accounts."
Suetonius was not alive when Julius Caesar was alive, nonetheless, No scholar has ever seen this as a problem. When referring to Suetonius's written accounts on the life of the Caesars. Once again, "the world hates Me because I testify that its works are evil" (John 7:7)
Suetonius was not alive when Julius Caesar was alive,
nonetheless, No scholar has ever seen this as a problem
Did anybody claim the Julius Caesar rose from the dead and created the universe? I guess if you don't understand why this isn't evidence for the claims of christianity then you are stupider than I thought!
Julius Caesar did claim he was a God along with Alexander, Cirus etc etc. Julius Caesar was the self appointed "high priest" of Rome and emperor worship became compulsory.
For, example Caligula ordered that a statue be placed in the Jewish temple so that Jews under compulsory law worship him.
The "F*** off" statement proves that you have lost the debate, don't even bother writing a reply post. That's why Christianity is a superior worldview because putrid language is abhorred by Scripture.
The "F*** off" statement proves that you have lost the debate, don't even bother writing a reply post
No it proves people like you don't give a fuck about what is actually true and use arguments that prove every other religion is just as true! They have books! Mohamed and Buddha probably existed! Therefore the doctrine of Islam and Buddhism are true! Prove to me that Mohamed didn't talk to an angel!
Every religion in the world is exclusivistic. Every religion claims to be the only way to God, heaven, Nirvana, etc. Many have supernatural claims. However, none have the eyewitness to assert the story is true. For example, Mohammed claims that he flew to heaven from Jerusalem on a flying donkey called a "Barak."
He flew in the "middle of the night" so no body witnessed the occurrence. All of his followers agreed it was true (or their heads would get lopped off) but they didn't witness it.
When we look at the evidence honestly and without preconceived ideas. We see that the NT has indisputable evidence. There a total of 24,788 existing ancient manuscript copies of the New Testament. That is before the end of the 3rd century. If anyone questions the reliability of the NT based upon the manuscript evidence, they will have to discount all classical ancient literature. No one in history has this much evidence. Not even all of the caesars combined!
"If anyone questions the reliability of the NT based upon the manuscript evidence, they will have to discount all classical ancient literature."
If I have to take the stories in the new testament seriously than I have to take the Odyssey Seriously as well. Extraordinary claims and no extraordinary evidence. Just stories and hearsay.
You mean four anonymous "Eye witness testimonies" written 50 years later that contradict each other left and right? That were VOTED into the cannon 300 years later?
You mean four anonymous "Eye witness testimonies" written 50 years later that contradict each other left and right? That were VOTED into the cannon 300 years later?
"There are more copies of the Davinice code" = Straw man fallacy!
"24,788 existing ancient manuscript copies" = More evidence in existence of the historical person of Jesus then exists for any other person in ancient history.
Nef2442: What you have is anecdotal evidence. Your supernatural story accounts may appear very vivid, but you are a victim of cognitive bias, or subjective validation. In court, it would pass as pseudoscientific evidence and would be rejected. But we're not in court of course, and you just appear delusional , or in other words, wishful thinking. Your arguments ooze with emotional weight and you don't sound reasonable. Sorry.
Lets 4get Ovid existed, because we don't have nearly as much evidence that he existed. Lets scratch off Alexander, all of the Caesars etc.
Not one person in ancient history has as many MSS (manuscripts) accounts as the person of Jesus Christ. But according to you its anecdotal at best??? lol!
Your argument form derives from an "argument from (scientific) authority." That falls in the inductive form which means "probabilistic at best"! Fail!
nef2442: anybody who believes that they have PROOF that some 2000 year old zombie rose from the dead to love them needs therapy. You're the big fail.Look up anecdotal evidence. That's what you have, doesn't matter what you think you have. Stop comparing the "evidence" with evidence of roman emperors please, you're just embarrassing yourself.
No, wrong again. It isn't an ad hominen attack. Seems to me you hear of these terms without really understanding what they mean. It is an anecdotal in nature. period.
Eye witness account would not hold up in a court of law? "oozes with too much emotional weight"?
Wow! you make a lot of sense!
Read Lee Strobel's "A Case for Christ" (he was an atheist who decided to put the historical Jesus to the test) using all of the tools he could employ as a successful advocate. After accumulating all of the available evidence he became a born again Christian. As an atheist Lawyer he discovered that the evidence was irrefutable. So much for your court of law theory!
No. The theory of evolution is scientific. So is the big bang theory. If you don't know the difference between what is "pseudo" and what is "theory", or worse if you pretend not to know, i can't help it. You base your arguments on anecdotal evidence, it doesn't matter what you say: it is what it is. And yes, it is embarrassing for an adult to believe that some guy rose from the dead. Well, to believe is one thing, but to claim it's been proven...wow
i think it's very telling that we are exchanging these comments in a kirk cameron video...he uses the same arguments as you. You think he makes sense? he's wrong almost everytime he says something.
and just so you know, nef2442: in science, there are no "proofs". what provides support for a theory is overwhelming evidence - with NONE to the contrary.
Google "pubmed", go to the 1st site, then search "evolution" You will find over 250,000 peer-reviewed articles pertaining to the evidence of evolution. How is that for "probabilistic". The fact that credentials play a part in deciding who's story makes more sense should be enough to reject your resurection tale.
yes, quite sad isn't it? And they all base their arguments "purely on evidence", just like yourself lol. I'm sorry, i cannot take you seriously. If you don't see the sham, you're a victim.And the funny thing, you think exaclty the opposite: you think i'm a victim. Yes of course, 28,000 MMS...rose from the dead...to love me....to save me....of course.
The concept of peer-review only makes sense in the context of experts in a field, able to perform impartial review. Dunce. Not performed by people who use faith as the backbone of their existence, but rather explore DOUBT.
There are hundreds of thousands of peer-reviewed articles on Intelligent design. Look at Michael Behe's works for example. "Darwin's Black Box" for starters.
yes nef2442, there are hundreds of peer-reviewed articles on intelligent design. All written by adepts of love-chain encircles, you know the ones that sing off-key in churches. you know, your crowd.
Julius Caesar claimed that he was a God, but his claim went unsubstantiated for the simple reason that he was not divine.
Jesus on the other hand has insurmountable eyewitness accounts attesting to His divinity. Jesus said that he was the Son of God and he gave evidence for His claim.
Caesar and Alexander made the same claim but when it came to contributing something supernatural there was only fizz...
Jesus mad extraordinary claims but backed them up, evidence-in-tow!
Jesus on the other hand has insurmountable eyewitness accounts attesting to His divinity
Or anonymous religious propaganda know as the gospels. No accounts outside the bible of these amazing events! I might as well take the book of Mormon seriously too!
Hey atheist smart guy, why do you celebrate Christ-mass if you are an atheist?
Its really cute, that you take the real empirical science from Christians. Real scientists who actually impressed our lives with wonderful inventions. Newton and Bacon for example. Then celebrate our holidays (Christ-mass) utilize our values and then Call us (Christians) stupid for not believing not believing in mythology for adults (evolution). Truly amazing!
Christians adopted ancient greek values, Like?????
Polytheism??? Paganism???? Pederasty???polygamy???? how about infanticide??? Bestiality????? butchering fellow humans for sport???? Human Sacrifice????Which Greek value did we adopt?
Democracy. How about that? Or these: Rationalism, a theory of intellect and reason being the key source of knowledge, was evident in the Greek's architecture and the way they viewed themselves, humans. Idealism brought out the best of all the abilities of the Greeks, only viewing and thinking about things in their most ideal form. Humanism was also revealed in every aspect of their lives, in the way they took breaks from work and toil to enjoy games to being able to adapt to anything.
Yeah and the Greeks had a Pantheon of Gods, You can't handle one in our culture, imagine polytheism?
Plato said that Atheists in Greece should be imprisoned for 5 yrs and the penalty for a 2nd offense was death!
"And when the time of their imprisonment has expired, if any of them be of sound mind let him be restored to sane company, but if not, and if he be condemned a second time, let him be punished with death" (Plato).
you are the ignorant one and you have lost the debate by resorting to expletives.
You tried to use Greek knowledge until I shut you up with the fact that they killed Atheists in ancient Greece.
Even Neitszche said he could not believe in Evolution because if "survival of the fittest" were true and animals progressed, then why can't a bomb kill one bacteria and yet the largest animals (the most evolved) can be killed by a vapor?
i lose credibility because i post on a vid about ray comfort?with logic like that nef2444, i am not surprised that you're a creationist. you better come up with somn else, i don't like debating with dimwits.
It seems to work with expletives. Oh wow! Greeks killed atheists! STOP THE FUCKING PRESSES! Hey jack ass, christians kill there own as well as anyone that doesn't agree with their personal agenda.
Ahhh Where did you shut me up punk?
As for Nietzsche... SO! He is not the end all be all. He had issue with religion... Like me and most intelligent people.
"christians kill there own as well as anyone that doesn't agree with their personal agenda." Oh yeah like which Christians? And please do not bring up Crusades or Inquisitions yada yada bull!
Because those atrocities were committed in the name of political gain. Jesus teaches to turn your other cheek and to pray for your enemies. To love those who persecute you. So it is pretty self evident that those atrocities were politically motivated and not Christian in principle.
You really are not very bright are you? Hey here is a tip for you sparky... That big glowing orb in the sky is the sun and it doesn't rotate around the earth... WE ROTATE around it.
it was a Christian who figured that one out! Atheists talk junk about how the Catholic Church suppressed scientific advancements. But it was mostly a theological matter, Copernicus was more devout then the persecuting preists!
The Nashville "Christian Advocate" was decrying the theory as a threat to faith as early as 1880. Evolutionary sciences met widespread resistance in the fundamentalist segments of the U.S.
I guess you forgot about the Scopes trial in 1925.
When? When was it FUCKING ILLEGAL YOU DUMB FUCK!?
Never.. it never was illegal in the US... Maybe some back water fucks tried to make it so but never a state or federal law.
You know.... Kirk Cameron is fuckin brilliant scientist... not
Spaceman2451 3 days ago
You know, the Christians go on about how the Athiests claim that "Nothing created everything"... but their own argument is that: Nothing created God who created everything!!! Oh, yeah, because that makes TOTAL sense.
MyNameHidden123 4 weeks ago
this guy OWNs that fat fucker hitchens
dhide14 3 months ago
I didnt mean to offend anyone out of my comments. I just feel like I have to say, I feel like I have struck a nerve somewhere.
blueblurblahblee462 8 months ago
well, in genetics (PS just curious BTW), it says that only cells can create cells, what happened at the beginning where there were no organisms?
blueblurblahblee462 8 months ago
That's not a scientific impossibility. Big bang.
jguth66 8 months ago
@jguth66 wow ur dumb. Before the big bang there was nothing. What happened there mister :DDD
blueblurblahblee462 8 months ago
@blueblurblahblee462
Read it. Unless, you find the members of the WND Superstore to be more knowledgeable on this topic than the scientific community, in which case, this argument is not worth having. I require the people I debate with to not be dogmatic and over-zealous to that degree.
jguth66 8 months ago
@blueblurblahblee462
When one looks at the universe through the scope of quantum physics, as opposed to classical physics, creating "something from nothing", is scientifically possible. Ray Comfort makes himself appear intelligent by stumping uninformed atheists about the creation of the universe. How about he has an intellectual debate with say, Hawkins, or another theoretical/quantum physicist. If the Big Bang was scientifically impossible, then why would the scientific community embrace it?
jguth66 8 months ago
@jguth66 The Big Bang theory (more accurately referred to as the expanding universe theory) states that all of the matter still existed, just in a singularity.
shagoosty 1 month ago
Why is this in education category?
Mitche23 10 months ago
shameless ignorance
pineconesaresmallnow 11 months ago
Haha don’t know if I'm going to cry or laugh at he's logic. He's point is that everything has to be created from something (God). But that’s bringing us back to the old question, "who created God" and we are back in an endless circle.
Now the first guy did answer him. We don’t know. Because no one knows, yet. And say that god did it, now that’s just sad. Saying that something magical did it does not explain anything; just make it harder to understand. Prove nothing at al.
TheRobinL 1 year ago 3
@TheRobinL nobody because He didn't need to exist
1dtants 4 months ago
somehow i think, that if all the creationists and other believers out there, would just take a minute to actually try to understand their opponents argumentation, religion would die out in about one minute....
liquidminds 1 year ago 2
atheism has nothing to do with beleiving that nothing created everything.
TheLiberalSoup 1 year ago 2
Just say God created them. Easy. lol jk Funny.
Eugene012 1 year ago
You don't need a Cameron's book to deny evolution. Just close your eyes, stuck one finger in each ear and say "la la la la" to reallity
Matter and Energy E X I S T interchangeably, nor can been created or destroyed.
Don't say it's imposiible only because your can't understand somtehing.
Sorry for my English.
enochalvarado 1 year ago 2
My fellow atheists, you are not alone. :)
bookwormsrcool 1 year ago 2
This might work on 4-6 year old kids, maybe.......
ekorre33 1 year ago 2
Keep it simple stupid !!!
fcontitwo 1 year ago
they seem to have a real hard time with this one !!!
fcontitwo 1 year ago
I'm sure a lot of people will find "Comfort" in this book but certainly not much else. How sleazy can you be, just playing stupid on the whole scientific rationale for life on earth? Your side of the argument is dumbed down so far that it's main point of attack is that nobody has any idea how life could exist without God? Oh, my. Well at least you got that Cameron guy before the Scientologist's did.
H1gh11 1 year ago
What stupidity! Ray Comfort has to be the stupidest person on Youtube.
masala505 1 year ago
Oh my god, I'm converted! This has answered my question of where everything came from! Good thing I don't question where god came from b/c, boy howdy, that'd be stupid! God just always existed and needed absolutely no causation at all! I'm glad that my logic disproving atheist suddenly doesn't apply to what I believe!
0hN0M3l0n 1 year ago
its funny their making the argument something cant come from something but they'll jump on board of the argument that the shit god makes just pops out of thin air also, its the same damn argument.
andrewPHY 2 years ago
Yeah, but in their version they get to feel superior and to tell us that we are all going to go to hell!
TheLivingDinosaur 2 years ago
where did god come from??? did he just pop out of no where and create everything? someone had to create god right?
alucardgrindcore 2 years ago
Uh,God is "Unbegotten".
Windows7User1 2 years ago
god who came from nothing created everything. Video Disproved.
MaxwellBennett 2 years ago
In addition Evolutionists consistently brush aside a major problem with their theory, namely that we do not see an abundance of mutation failures which should be several times more numerous than successful adaptations. We should see millions of one eyed humans and apes, because an eye requires less energy for its brain power (than to run two eyes for example) and adds greatly to a mammal's viability. The fact is that things were engineered perfectly as they are, it is mutation which is the enemy
lightwithoutlimit 2 years ago
they were engineered so perfectly that 25% of the world's population needs glasses by the age of 25. And your comment about "so called transitional species to be absent betwen animal groups" (sic) shows that you do not understand the mechanic of the theory you reject. Please stop using the same old "eye argument" that's been refuted 1000 times. Come up with the flying horse or something.
victorsossa 2 years ago
@victorsossa
by any chance are you a member of archerytalk and go by the name warbow??? you sound just like her when there a religious debate.
alucardgrindcore 2 years ago
"Sun Is a Light 32 Miles Across"
"Galileo Was a Liar"
"Nikita Krushchev Father of NASA" (misspelling in the original)
"The Earth Is Not a Ball; Gravity Does Not Exist"
"The Earth Has No Motion"
"Science Insults Your Intelligence"
"World IS Flat, and That's That"
"Australia Not Down Under"
"Whole World Deceived Except the Very Elect"
sounds familiar? they're all headlines from Flat Earth News. Lighwithoutlimit...that's where you are. Sorry.
victorsossa 2 years ago 2
... you say having one eye requires less brain power to run than 2 eyes. And that it adds viability to mammals. I dont even know where to begin explaining all the horrible misconceptions you demonstrate in that post.
Actually, human mutation probably occurs at a rate of about one mutation per 33 million nucleotides per generation. In the majority of cases, they are harmless.
sheilacow 2 years ago
The fact is that evolutionists cannot point to observable macroevolution because it doesnt exist. The Cambrian period is a perfect example of "bursts" of new species. In addition I suggest you look up problems with fossil layers and the fossils themselves. Fossils are frequently out of place by "millions of years" , there are vertical (or upside down) tree trunks in several stratus layers, and the millions of so called "transitional species" to be absent between animal groups.
lightwithoutlimit 2 years ago
lightwithoutlimit: are you familiar with Malgrem's work "Evidence for punctuated gradualism in the late Neogene Globorotalia tumida lineage of planktonic foraminifera." ? Give it a read. And learn about the actual process of evolution before repeating ad nauseum the pseudo debate of micro-macro distinction. You're right about one thing: it doesn't exist outside the fantasy world of space-daddy followers.
victorsossa 2 years ago
"Are you sitting down?...Good.
Richard Lenski, biologist at Michigan State has observed over twenty years 44,000 generations of E Coli bacteria. One population after 31,000 generations mutated and adapted a means to metabolize citrate, a nutrient E Coli normally can not make use of.
Testable,... observable... and repeatable."
Wow thats amazing...except that its still a bacteria. No ones questioning adaptation, youve once again attacked a straw man.
lightwithoutlimit 2 years ago
You disbelieve the supernatural and yet the supernatrual is an integral aspect of your existence. For example, you live on a ball that floats in an infinite universe of space and there is a ball of fire hanging outside of your window keeping you warm and alive. Sure we know all of the scientific principles that describe the functions of celestial bodies but the very facts of their magnificent existence is beyond the scope of some supernatural events depicted in Biblical history.
nef2442 2 years ago
You disbelieve the supernatural and yet the supernatrual is an integral aspect of your existence
No, the supernatural plays NO PART in my existence. The sun and the earth are not supernatural.
SolomonGrundy101 2 years ago
Atheists believe that the most intelligent being in this world -human being- was formed alone, without an intelligence in the process, just random mutations, natural selection and many many years. Thats nonsense.
sion7111 2 years ago
ya, atheists and 99% of the scientific community. (real scientists, not creationist frauds)
victorsossa 2 years ago
99% is probably not an exact proportion. There are many scientifics (even not religious people) who don't believe in evolution, but, even if your figure is true... so what? If the majority believes a lie, that makes a lie true? That is called a "faulty appeal to authority" fallacy.
sion7111 2 years ago
that's fine. i'll just go along with the overwhelming majority of scientists, and you can believe in your space daddy, or Fred the Benevolent Cosmic Muffin if it makes you feel any better.
victorsossa 2 years ago
watch this amazing video on youtube "Praying robber turns self in after mom sees him on TV"
IndependentMediaCall 2 years ago
nef2442,
Why don't you communicate with someone who is trying to have the same conversation you are trying to give. You have the wrong person my friend.
And everything from the above I tried to say politely and I'm sorry if I came across any other way. Also I'm not trying to change your beliefs and I have no intention to change what you believe or dont' believe in.
Thank you
ChartierProductions 2 years ago
nef2442,
It's easy to see that you believe in God. You must just believe because someone told you about him, or maybe he has spoken to you. I don't know and I don't care.
I unfortunately haven't seen, heard, etc God and wonder of his existance.
I don't need to prove or disprove anything to you because I never made a statement to prove or disprove anything you keep takling to me about.
ChartierProductions 2 years ago
nef2442,
I'm not even trying to take sides here, but you just can't stop can you?
It's simple: An atheist proposes that there is no God because they don't have knowledge/proof that God exists, which could mean that God has never spoken to them, they have never seen God, etc etc. Theists believe in God just because and some believe in God b/c he has spoken to them or they have seen him, etc etc.
ChartierProductions 2 years ago
That's a tough question to answer, atheist or not. It's implying the answer is known to someone. Theists can easily say (because they don't know) that God must have created it because they can't explain it. That way they don't have to find evidence on their own when they can just say God did it. Where as an atheist who doensn't know the answer, just responds that they don't know.
ChartierProductions 2 years ago
if what you say were true there would be no theory of evolution.
nef2442 2 years ago
nef2442,
Why are you bringing another topic to the discussion? I made a statement about an atheist who responds to a question they don't know as, "I don't know." and you bring up the theory of evolution. I'm not talking about theories, I'm talking about the unknown, which would be things not yet know without any type of scientific fact. To have a theory you must have something to back it up, else you would be a fool, right?
ChartierProductions 2 years ago
Comment removed
phelius 2 years ago
Actually by definition the atheist proposes that their is no God. As if they had foreknowledge to assert that conclusion. "A theory or belief that God does not exist" You are trying to prove a negative, the onus is on you to provide the evidence for God not existing.
nef2442 2 years ago
nef2442,
Honestly? I mean you seem to be 1/2 way smart, but then you add something that is just ridiculous. Someone has fed you some crazy stuff over the years, haven't they?
I never said God does or doesn't exist. Show me where I said that? We are (I'm) talking about Theists and Atheists and you keep changing the subject.
ChartierProductions 2 years ago
It is NO BELIEF IN DEITIES OR A SINGULAR DEITY.
The burden of proof is with you and YOUR flock. You are the ones that need to bring evidence in order for those, like me, that are skeptical. To follow anything that requires blind faith and love to a god that we need to fear is just plain wrong.
caveman73 2 years ago
Who made the material used to create the creator? Who pushed the create the creator button? Who made the machine that created the creator?
What a dumb video...
phelius 2 years ago
The Bible answers your questions. God created the earth and He is Alpha & Omega without beginning or end.
You know just like that scientific principle concerning energy that read so much about in school.
"Energy can not be created or destroyed"
First Law of Thermodynamics ring any bells?
nef2442 2 years ago
I wish I could explain to you how silly you sound. Where then did the energy come from to make your creator?
Don't you dare refer me to the book in question. and don't you dare give me more circlular reasoning.
phelius 2 years ago
I know logical reasoning can sometimes confound.
nef2442 2 years ago
"With special Condemnation by Richard Dorkins..." hilarious LOL
jbooks888 2 years ago
I'd love to read the scientific paper called "Nothing created Everything".
pyrite13 2 years ago
tell us again the funny ray comfort banana story..i like that one.
victorsossa 2 years ago
Who cares if people believe in God! It doesn't bother me! If people want to worship Matter or a Rock or even yet Science...Who Cares? I think there is some Politics here or maybe God is real and it bothers them? So Chill out you bunch of CRO-MAGNUMS and "LET IT BE" by the Beatles! Chill!!!
LiberalXXX 2 years ago
Looks like Caveman 73 is a little angry! I think he is still in Cro-magnon evolutionary stage! He must be a Latent Homosexual with Baby Killing tendacies?
LiberalXXX 2 years ago
Why are all you athiest so angry with Christianity! What is it about this Faith that bothers you? The anger astounds me? Maybe it's because all of you are homosexuals and like to murder little babies and because a faith like Christianity believes in Morality and has Values and you just want to live your hedonistic life denying God but in reality believe,but deny evidence so you can feel good when you screw another man in the ass and you all want Christians to except this disgusting life style.
LiberalXXX 2 years ago
looks like liberalxx has gay issues.
victorsossa 2 years ago
you don't need faith to aknowldege evolution. you don't have to believe in it. can you possibly take 'belief' out of the equation, or are you too stuck up in your faith system? wow nef4442, you really put the anal in analyse.
victorsossa 2 years ago
"The unexamined life is not worth living" (Socrates).
Once you examine in what your atheist beliefs are truly rooted in. Then You will begin to understand that it requires more faith then most Christians presume to have.
There are 2.7 Billion people who presume to have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ. You presume that you can prove all 2.7 billion are wrong Because YOU know without a reasonable doubt that there is no God. Good luck with your new found faith in atheism bub!
nef2442 2 years ago
it's "more faith THAN most. not then.i know it's hard for you. Well it's either 2.7 billion are wrong, (of course that number was inflated) or 1.2 muslims are wrong, or maybe it's the 1 million hindus. of course they cannot ALL be right. bub.
victorsossa 2 years ago
nef2422. 2.7 million....yeah definitely 2.7 million fleas on the carpet...definitely..yeah ray...definitely
victorsossa 2 years ago
So weak.... Hey did you know the the church thought the earth was the center of the universe...... Sun rotated around the earth...... Earth was flat.... 4 corners of the earth ring a bell?
caveman73 2 years ago
Wrong again caveman, when are you going to step out of the cavernous ignorance of unbelief and step into the light.
The reason why POLITICALLY minded Catholics decided to persecute the more devoutly Christian then his persecutors Copernicus, because they were concerned over political matters and not theological ones, in short, they were not reading their Bible.
Written over 2 and 1/2 millennia ago...(Isaiah 40:22) "It is He that sitteth upon the sphere of the earth."
nef2442 2 years ago
It is like agreeing with a brick wall.
"Faith is believing something you know ain't true." ~ Mark Twain.
Atheism is not a belief system or something requiring faith... That is all other religions. Atheism... AGAIN IS NO BELIEF IN A GOD OR GODS!!!!
Do you get the picture and I getting through to ya?
caveman73 2 years ago
Aside: Ray Comfort looks a whole lot like Flanders.
Cameron's conundrum: he absolutely believes that something was created from nothing. By MAGIC. Wielded by a MAGICAL BEING.
What a fallback position when confronted by an unknown.
A magical being done it by magic. Well. I'M convinced -- ain't YOU?
rumble54daddyo 2 years ago
*Massaging Temples* Let me ask you a question, Kirk!
Do you honestly think that God spoke everything to existance OUT OF NOTHING!!!!! No tools, no materials, just pure FREAKIN' MAGIC!!!!!!!!!
Now tell me that creationists are so much more intellectual than us!
I really can't take it anymore!
Bowmaj21 2 years ago
In the words of Ray Comfort, " You can bring an atheist to evidence, but you can't make him think."
nef2442 2 years ago
Wow taking words from a man that is blissfully ignorant. You sir are the weakest link... Please don't breed and pollute the gene pool.
caveman73 2 years ago
awesome vid! truly shows how ignorant and just plain stupid evos, and atheists are, sorry for the insult, but its true.
infinitemika 2 years ago
This is Ray approaching random people on the street expecting them to all be scientists and expecting them to know where we came from. If we knew where we came from then surely we would also have found a cure for AIDS/HIV, Cancer etc. 200 years ago, humans were not even aware of most metals we have on todays periodical table. I am no scientist and do not claim to know where we come from. Just my two cents and no offence meant if any caused.
WorldCommonSense 2 years ago
Christians believe the Moon is made of cheese.
abstracht 2 years ago 4
It's not!!??
Those lying sacks of shit at the church retreat.
caveman73 2 years ago
Ray is so full of shit, I've asked for these same questions and he's too chickenshit to ask me.
he ask questions in a way you look bad answering it. god didnt make shit and asshole your asshole book the bible said he made everything from nothing.
sage0857 2 years ago 3
When you believe in nothing you will fall for anything
cupera1 2 years ago
A simple walk through an insane asylum shows that having absolute faith in something has no effect on making it true.
VeritasLiber 2 years ago 2
And when you believe bullshit you become full of shit.
Religion..... The easy button for the EPICALLY STUPID & WEAK MINDED!
caveman73 2 years ago
The religion of darwinism does need a lot of faith
cupera1 2 years ago
We atheist don't worship Darwin, we respect the man for what he has done. Worship is your all's BS. GO be a sheep! Baaaaah! Baaah!
caveman73 2 years ago
The theology of Darwinism requires much more faith the other religions because the lack of scientific evidence to support their claims.
cupera1 2 years ago
Not religion you simple mined sheep. It is a SCIENTIFIC THEROY. Not made up bullshit from sheep herders 2000 years ago.
Do you just have a low IQ or are truly happy and proud to be this ignorant?
caveman73 2 years ago
evolution is worse than a religion, its a sordid cult!
nef2442 2 years ago
Oh please enlighten us with some of this cult talk. Are you a high school drop out or were you home schooled by the most brainwashed religious parents ever?
Don't bother answering.. I don't want to give your small mind a headache.
caveman73 2 years ago
Read an excerpt from "The Myth of Religious Neutrality" by Robert A. Clouser. OR watch The Lennox Vs. Hitchens debate.
Christians have always been the greatest intellectuals and now true empiricism in Science is being suppressed by the cultists in academia who try to force feed minds the mythology for adults (evolution).
nef2442 2 years ago
You once again show your utter stupidity and blindness to logic and reason.
How is it than that studies have shown that the higher the IQ or the higher the education a person has the less likely they are to believe in ANY religion or worship a god or gods?
Christians are not the greatest intelectuals, not even close.
caveman73 2 years ago
Ok lets take the smartest atheist you dimwits have (Christopher Hitchens) and lets take a smart Christian (John Lennox) and put them together for a debate. The debate is called "Is God Great"
Watch what happens when the wisdom of the foolish goes up against a wise Christian in a debate. You can watch it for yourself.
Lennox makes Hitchens look like the bumbling fool that he is.
Cheers!
nef2442 2 years ago
myth: A traditional, typically ancient story dealing with supernatural beings, ancestors, or heroes that serves as a fundamental type in the worldview of a people, as by explaining aspects of the natural world or delineating the psychology, customs, or ideals of society
victorsossa 2 years ago
god is a myth. period.
victorsossa 2 years ago
the sad part is that ray comfort and others like him at least have an interest in telling their stories: they make money that way, selling the stories to gullible people. You, on the other hand...well you just fell for it lol
victorsossa 2 years ago
Who claimed one that CH was the most intelligent atheist? Two what does a debate prove? Oh I know... It means you won an argument. What it doesn't mean as that what you were arguing for is right or correct.
You are not very bright are you? This is basic debate 101... High School shit.
Oh wait..did you go to a christian school?
caveman73 2 years ago
"You can lead an atheist to evidence, but you can't make him think" (Ray Comfort).
nef2442 2 years ago
Mythology: The body of myths belonging to a culture. Myths are traditional stories about gods and heroes. They often account for the basic aspects of existence — explaining, for instance, how the Earth was created, why people have to die, or why the year is divided into seasons. Classical mythology — the myths of the ancient Greeks and Romans — has had an enormous influence on European and American culture.
Sounds like christianity to me.
caveman73 2 years ago
Myths are traditional stories (like 150 years of Darwinian evolution).
Evolution is mythology for adults. "How the Earth was created (evolution)"
"The myths of the ancient Greeks and Romans-had enormous influence"
Sounds like the Darwinists , they have "enormous influence."
In the words of Ray Comfort, " You can bring an atheist to evidence, but you can't make him drink."
nef2442 2 years ago
What fucking evidence? A bullshit book written by halfwit shepherds? Wow! I am sold.. .Sign me up for some jebus juice.
Ray Comfort is a fucking joke! The man has no true knowledge on how biology or evolution. He twists and lies like the snake he is.
Influence in the amount of INFORMATION on how life grows and evolves. Hey tell me is a bat a bird? The bible thinks so. Boy that is some high IQ stuff huh?
caveman73 2 years ago
Evolution is mythology for adults. "How the Earth was created (evolution)"
Evolution has nothing to do with the formation of the earth.
SolomonGrundy101 2 years ago
Please explain where the faith is required. It's a scientific theory (which means it has been proven) that has never been shown in error for 150 years, is the backbone of all branches of biology and is the only guiding force behind the development od treatments against bacteria and germs (which means you personally should reject an antibiotics since they are created based on evolutionary theory). Besides that it has also been observed in a Lab using E Coli. I could go on if you like.
sfehrenbach 2 years ago 2
Get the facts Straight Lemming!
In 1942, Nobel Laureate Ernst Chain wrote that his discovery of penicillin (with Howard Florey and Alexander Fleming) and the development of bacterial resistance to that antibiotic owed nothing to Darwin's and Alfred Russel Wallace's evolutionary theories.
He added, "I'd rather believe in fairies then in evolution."
nef2442 2 years ago
Did he, so what? Again, it does not follow that since one person disagrees with an idea, that idea is wrong. Try again!
SolomonGrundy101 2 years ago
One person disagrees? Lol! how about millions in this country alone. It was illegal to teach evolution in this country just until recently. Well at least until the culture leaches began their great spiritual bleeding of the nation.
nef2442 2 years ago
It was illegal to teach evolution in this country just until recently
Because insecure Religious nuts don't like that the evidence doesn't support there ideas. Better make a law!
SolomonGrundy101 2 years ago
You didn't see religious nuts condemn any other sciencetific theories. Oh wait that not's true Eugenics Theory was banned for a little while until Darwinists proved how beneficial it could be for society!
nef2442 2 years ago
You didn't see religious nuts condemn any other sciencetific theories
Yeah. they reject plate tectonics, radiometric dating, the big bang theory and some still believe in geocentricism. You certainly are an angry little asshole, aren't you!
SolomonGrundy101 2 years ago
prove tectonics, prove radio metric dating methods work, and when you build that time machine that travels back billions of years. Then maybe we can begin discussing big bangs.
As for a geocentricism, i think your stretching your self their bud.
Oh and Christians don't believe in bigfoot, UFO's, Lochness, monster, or yeti!
In the words of Ernst Boris Chains,
"I'd sooner believe in fairies, then in Evolution"
nef2442 2 years ago
Already been proven.
"when you build that time machine that travels back billions of years. Then maybe we can begin discussing big bangs. "
That's some grade a moronic ideas you have there! Build a time machine and prove isaac newton really existed. I think the universe is 3 days old and newton is part of the universes' "appearance of age"
Ernst Boris Chains,
The creationist. So why do I care what he said?
SolomonGrundy101 2 years ago
The reason why I believe Isaac Newton existed is because there is enough historical evidence from eyewitness sources. And there are statues of him every where in Europe his grave is in Europe the fact that he held the title as the first Laucasian of Mathematics in Cambridge etc.etc.
For you to equate empirical history with historical mythology for adults shows what a true lemming you are. Hey I have a theory, with 0 evidence, Peter pan did it!
nef2442 2 years ago
The reason why I believe Isaac Newton existed is because there is enough historical evidence from eyewitness sources
Yeah but since the universe is 3 days old and the "historical evidence" was manufactured by Jehovah. I have no reason to believe you!
SolomonGrundy101 2 years ago
Actually Jesus Christ has more historical evidence that He existed than Isaac Newton does. The further you go back in history the worse it gets for you bub! So I would leave that one alone. lol!
There are more paintings let alone historical accounts of Jesus then there are written records of Isaac Newton. Or any other person in History.
If you took every scientist that ever lived and put all of their bio's together you wouldn't get as many recorded accounts as there are of Christ!
nef2442 2 years ago
No, the bible isn't "historical evidence " of Jesus.
Outside the bible there are almost NO historical accounts of Jesus. There are historical accounts of CHRISTIANS but no historical accounts of Jesus outside the bible written during or shortly after his life . Nobody noticed!
SolomonGrundy101 2 years ago
Here are a few of the historical sources from the first century that have mentioned Jesus (during His lifetime).
Greco Roman Sources: Flavius Josephus, Tacitus, Suetonius, Pliny the Younger, Thallus, Julius Africanus,Lucian, Celsus, The Talmud, The Acts of Pilate,
nef2442 2 years ago
NONE of those wrote about Jesus during his lifetime. And none of them did anything other than state what Christians believed already.
"Josephus,"
The passage in book 3 verse 18 of the Antiquities of the jews is widely thought to be a fraud!
SolomonGrundy101 2 years ago
Notice no other passage in "Antiquities" is considered fraudulent.
Jesus once said, The worldhates Me because I testify that its works are evil (John 7:7).
For you to say that tacitus, Suetonius, Pliny the Younger etc. etc. did not mention Jesus is pure fraudulence on your part.
For example,Tacitus writes, "Christus had undergone the death penalty in the reign of Tiberius, by sentence of the procurator Pontius Pilate" (Annals 15.44).
nef2442 2 years ago
"For you to say that tacitus, Suetonius, Pliny the Younger etc. etc. did not mention Jesus is pure fraudulence on your part. "
NONE of those wrote about Jesus during his lifetime. IS WHAT I SAID. Which they did not. None of these people were contemparies of jesus or claimed to witness any of things mentioned in the bible. They simply rehashed what the Christians believed. If a historian mentioned Josphef smith is that evidence for the golden plates and the angel moroni?
SolomonGrundy101 2 years ago
pure fraudulence on your part.
No it's pure STUPID on your part to not understand what I was saying!
SolomonGrundy101 2 years ago
Scholars agree that Peter (eyewitness) along with Mark (eyewitness) were in Rome in the early 60's (1Peter 5:13).
Historians like Tacitus and Pliny the Younger were writing History in the making "eyewitness accounts."
Suetonius was not alive when Julius Caesar was alive, nonetheless, No scholar has ever seen this as a problem. When referring to Suetonius's written accounts on the life of the Caesars. Once again, "the world hates Me because I testify that its works are evil" (John 7:7)
nef2442 2 years ago
Suetonius was not alive when Julius Caesar was alive,
nonetheless, No scholar has ever seen this as a problem
Did anybody claim the Julius Caesar rose from the dead and created the universe? I guess if you don't understand why this isn't evidence for the claims of christianity then you are stupider than I thought!
SolomonGrundy101 2 years ago
Julius Caesar did claim he was a God along with Alexander, Cirus etc etc. Julius Caesar was the self appointed "high priest" of Rome and emperor worship became compulsory.
For, example Caligula ordered that a statue be placed in the Jewish temple so that Jews under compulsory law worship him.
The "F*** off" statement proves that you have lost the debate, don't even bother writing a reply post. That's why Christianity is a superior worldview because putrid language is abhorred by Scripture.
nef2442 2 years ago
The "F*** off" statement proves that you have lost the debate, don't even bother writing a reply post
No it proves people like you don't give a fuck about what is actually true and use arguments that prove every other religion is just as true! They have books! Mohamed and Buddha probably existed! Therefore the doctrine of Islam and Buddhism are true! Prove to me that Mohamed didn't talk to an angel!
SolomonGrundy101 2 years ago
Every religion in the world is exclusivistic. Every religion claims to be the only way to God, heaven, Nirvana, etc. Many have supernatural claims. However, none have the eyewitness to assert the story is true. For example, Mohammed claims that he flew to heaven from Jerusalem on a flying donkey called a "Barak."
He flew in the "middle of the night" so no body witnessed the occurrence. All of his followers agreed it was true (or their heads would get lopped off) but they didn't witness it.
nef2442 2 years ago
When we look at the evidence honestly and without preconceived ideas. We see that the NT has indisputable evidence. There a total of 24,788 existing ancient manuscript copies of the New Testament. That is before the end of the 3rd century. If anyone questions the reliability of the NT based upon the manuscript evidence, they will have to discount all classical ancient literature. No one in history has this much evidence. Not even all of the caesars combined!
nef2442 2 years ago
"If anyone questions the reliability of the NT based upon the manuscript evidence, they will have to discount all classical ancient literature."
If I have to take the stories in the new testament seriously than I have to take the Odyssey Seriously as well. Extraordinary claims and no extraordinary evidence. Just stories and hearsay.
SolomonGrundy101 2 years ago
No one in history has this much evidence.
You mean four anonymous "Eye witness testimonies" written 50 years later that contradict each other left and right? That were VOTED into the cannon 300 years later?
SolomonGrundy101 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
No one in history has this much evidence.
You mean four anonymous "Eye witness testimonies" written 50 years later that contradict each other left and right? That were VOTED into the cannon 300 years later?
SolomonGrundy101 2 years ago
There a total of 24,788 existing ancient manuscript copies of the New Testament.
So, what do the number of copies have to do with ANYTHING? There are more copies of the Davinci code in print, does that make it true or reliable?
SolomonGrundy101 2 years ago
"There are more copies of the Davinice code" = Straw man fallacy!
"24,788 existing ancient manuscript copies" = More evidence in existence of the historical person of Jesus then exists for any other person in ancient history.
nef2442 2 years ago
Nef2442: What you have is anecdotal evidence. Your supernatural story accounts may appear very vivid, but you are a victim of cognitive bias, or subjective validation. In court, it would pass as pseudoscientific evidence and would be rejected. But we're not in court of course, and you just appear delusional , or in other words, wishful thinking. Your arguments ooze with emotional weight and you don't sound reasonable. Sorry.
victorsossa 2 years ago
24,788 existing MSS, is anecdotal evidence????
Lets 4get Ovid existed, because we don't have nearly as much evidence that he existed. Lets scratch off Alexander, all of the Caesars etc.
Not one person in ancient history has as many MSS (manuscripts) accounts as the person of Jesus Christ. But according to you its anecdotal at best??? lol!
Your argument form derives from an "argument from (scientific) authority." That falls in the inductive form which means "probabilistic at best"! Fail!
nef2442 2 years ago
nef2442: anybody who believes that they have PROOF that some 2000 year old zombie rose from the dead to love them needs therapy. You're the big fail.Look up anecdotal evidence. That's what you have, doesn't matter what you think you have. Stop comparing the "evidence" with evidence of roman emperors please, you're just embarrassing yourself.
victorsossa 2 years ago
. You attack my "anectdotal evidence" with an ad hominem attack. If any thing you are the one embarrassing yourself.
nef2442 2 years ago
No, wrong again. It isn't an ad hominen attack. Seems to me you hear of these terms without really understanding what they mean. It is an anecdotal in nature. period.
victorsossa 2 years ago
definitely 24,788 fleas on the carpet...ya...definitely...definitely 24,788 fleas on the carpet, Ray.
victorsossa 2 years ago
Eye witness account would not hold up in a court of law? "oozes with too much emotional weight"?
Wow! you make a lot of sense!
Read Lee Strobel's "A Case for Christ" (he was an atheist who decided to put the historical Jesus to the test) using all of the tools he could employ as a successful advocate. After accumulating all of the available evidence he became a born again Christian. As an atheist Lawyer he discovered that the evidence was irrefutable. So much for your court of law theory!
nef2442 2 years ago
Pseudoscientific evidence? You mean like The theory of evolution? Or the big bang theory? How about Eugenic theory, now passing around as Genetics?
The only difference between you and I is the "pseudoscientific evidence" we choose to place our faith in.
I happen to base my arguments purely on evidence whereas most secularists are arguing from authority.
And you know very well that an "argument from authority" is probabilistic at best!
nef2442 2 years ago
No. The theory of evolution is scientific. So is the big bang theory. If you don't know the difference between what is "pseudo" and what is "theory", or worse if you pretend not to know, i can't help it. You base your arguments on anecdotal evidence, it doesn't matter what you say: it is what it is. And yes, it is embarrassing for an adult to believe that some guy rose from the dead. Well, to believe is one thing, but to claim it's been proven...wow
victorsossa 2 years ago
i think it's very telling that we are exchanging these comments in a kirk cameron video...he uses the same arguments as you. You think he makes sense? he's wrong almost everytime he says something.
victorsossa 2 years ago
and just so you know, nef2442: in science, there are no "proofs". what provides support for a theory is overwhelming evidence - with NONE to the contrary.
victorsossa 2 years ago
Google "pubmed", go to the 1st site, then search "evolution" You will find over 250,000 peer-reviewed articles pertaining to the evidence of evolution. How is that for "probabilistic". The fact that credentials play a part in deciding who's story makes more sense should be enough to reject your resurection tale.
victorsossa 2 years ago
google Christians, you'll find 2 billion peer reviewed believers who profess to have a personal relationship with the risen Savior, Jesus Christ.
nef2442 2 years ago
yes, quite sad isn't it? And they all base their arguments "purely on evidence", just like yourself lol. I'm sorry, i cannot take you seriously. If you don't see the sham, you're a victim.And the funny thing, you think exaclty the opposite: you think i'm a victim. Yes of course, 28,000 MMS...rose from the dead...to love me....to save me....of course.
victorsossa 2 years ago
The concept of peer-review only makes sense in the context of experts in a field, able to perform impartial review. Dunce. Not performed by people who use faith as the backbone of their existence, but rather explore DOUBT.
victorsossa 2 years ago
There are hundreds of thousands of peer-reviewed articles on Intelligent design. Look at Michael Behe's works for example. "Darwin's Black Box" for starters.
nef2442 2 years ago
yes nef2442, there are hundreds of peer-reviewed articles on intelligent design. All written by adepts of love-chain encircles, you know the ones that sing off-key in churches. you know, your crowd.
victorsossa 2 years ago
Julius Caesar claimed that he was a God, but his claim went unsubstantiated for the simple reason that he was not divine.
Jesus on the other hand has insurmountable eyewitness accounts attesting to His divinity. Jesus said that he was the Son of God and he gave evidence for His claim.
Caesar and Alexander made the same claim but when it came to contributing something supernatural there was only fizz...
Jesus mad extraordinary claims but backed them up, evidence-in-tow!
nef2442 2 years ago
Jesus on the other hand has insurmountable eyewitness accounts attesting to His divinity
Or anonymous religious propaganda know as the gospels. No accounts outside the bible of these amazing events! I might as well take the book of Mormon seriously too!
SolomonGrundy101 2 years ago
Once again, "the world hates Me because I testify that its works are evil" (John 7:7)
Once again, fuck off and provide real evidence!
SolomonGrundy101 2 years ago
Those are all non-Christian sources by the way!
nef2442 2 years ago
"The reason why I believe Isaac Newton existed is because there is enough historical evidence from eyewitness sources"
I think those eyewitness testimonies were created by god to fool me! Because the earth is 3 day old!
SolomonGrundy101 2 years ago
Hey atheist smart guy, why do you celebrate Christ-mass if you are an atheist?
Its really cute, that you take the real empirical science from Christians. Real scientists who actually impressed our lives with wonderful inventions. Newton and Bacon for example. Then celebrate our holidays (Christ-mass) utilize our values and then Call us (Christians) stupid for not believing not believing in mythology for adults (evolution). Truly amazing!
nef2442 2 years ago
I don't
"utilize our values "
Yep the ancient Greek values of the Christians. What does the validity of empiricism have to do with Christianity? Nothing.
SolomonGrundy101 2 years ago
Christians adopted ancient greek values, Like?????
Polytheism??? Paganism???? Pederasty???polygamy???? how about infanticide??? Bestiality????? butchering fellow humans for sport???? Human Sacrifice????Which Greek value did we adopt?
smart guy???
nef2442 2 years ago
Democracy. How about that? Or these: Rationalism, a theory of intellect and reason being the key source of knowledge, was evident in the Greek's architecture and the way they viewed themselves, humans. Idealism brought out the best of all the abilities of the Greeks, only viewing and thinking about things in their most ideal form. Humanism was also revealed in every aspect of their lives, in the way they took breaks from work and toil to enjoy games to being able to adapt to anything.
caveman73 2 years ago
Yeah and the Greeks had a Pantheon of Gods, You can't handle one in our culture, imagine polytheism?
Plato said that Atheists in Greece should be imprisoned for 5 yrs and the penalty for a 2nd offense was death!
"And when the time of their imprisonment has expired, if any of them be of sound mind let him be restored to sane company, but if not, and if he be condemned a second time, let him be punished with death" (Plato).
nef2442 2 years ago
FUCK ALL RELIGIONS YOU STUPID SHIT! You are blind christian zombie.
Please go play in traffic and remove yourself from the gene pool.
caveman73 2 years ago
you are the ignorant one and you have lost the debate by resorting to expletives.
You tried to use Greek knowledge until I shut you up with the fact that they killed Atheists in ancient Greece.
Even Neitszche said he could not believe in Evolution because if "survival of the fittest" were true and animals progressed, then why can't a bomb kill one bacteria and yet the largest animals (the most evolved) can be killed by a vapor?
nef2442 2 years ago
wow. there are so many things that are wrong in your reasoning.. i'll just say this: you lose all credibility when you quote ray comfort.
victorsossa 2 years ago 2
you lose all credibility for saying that I lose all credibility when I quote ray comfort.
Primarily because you are making postings on a video about ray comfort.
You would have a point if the video were about something or someone else but the video that you are berating is about Ray Comfort!!!!!!!! Duh!!!!!
nef2442 2 years ago
i lose credibility because i post on a vid about ray comfort?with logic like that nef2444, i am not surprised that you're a creationist. you better come up with somn else, i don't like debating with dimwits.
victorsossa 2 years ago
He has a man crush on him.
caveman73 2 years ago
It seems to work with expletives. Oh wow! Greeks killed atheists! STOP THE FUCKING PRESSES! Hey jack ass, christians kill there own as well as anyone that doesn't agree with their personal agenda.
Ahhh Where did you shut me up punk?
As for Nietzsche... SO! He is not the end all be all. He had issue with religion... Like me and most intelligent people.
caveman73 2 years ago
"christians kill there own as well as anyone that doesn't agree with their personal agenda." Oh yeah like which Christians? And please do not bring up Crusades or Inquisitions yada yada bull!
Because those atrocities were committed in the name of political gain. Jesus teaches to turn your other cheek and to pray for your enemies. To love those who persecute you. So it is pretty self evident that those atrocities were politically motivated and not Christian in principle.
nef2442 2 years ago
Slavery?????Science??????? Writing in Greek????
SolomonGrundy101 2 years ago
You really are not very bright are you? Hey here is a tip for you sparky... That big glowing orb in the sky is the sun and it doesn't rotate around the earth... WE ROTATE around it.
caveman73 2 years ago
duh,
it was a Christian who figured that one out! Atheists talk junk about how the Catholic Church suppressed scientific advancements. But it was mostly a theological matter, Copernicus was more devout then the persecuting preists!
nef2442 2 years ago
Not true... Try again!
caveman73 2 years ago
Recently?
Please elaborate.
How recently?
The Nashville "Christian Advocate" was decrying the theory as a threat to faith as early as 1880. Evolutionary sciences met widespread resistance in the fundamentalist segments of the U.S.
I guess you forgot about the Scopes trial in 1925.
When? When was it FUCKING ILLEGAL YOU DUMB FUCK!?
Never.. it never was illegal in the US... Maybe some back water fucks tried to make it so but never a state or federal law.
caveman73 2 years ago
Bats are birds... According to your bible.... Wow The IQ just radiates from that book. HAHAHAHHA!
caveman73 2 years ago