Dan has shown the kind of courage that evangelical Christians claim to aspire to. What is wrong when a person looks at the data and simply cannot draw the "popular" conclusion?
Dan has a really high IQ (99th percentile) and a very extreme way of thinking. I think as a fundamentalist Christian he had walled off the rational/logical side of his brain- which is his stronger suit. Once he tasted reason for the first time, of course he was going to be just as extreme in his views, just now in a different direction. Today he uses MAINLY only the rational side of his mind and not the emotional. However as believers, I think we need to have a healthy balance of both sides.
Christians are taught to believe atheists are instruments of the actual devil. How the hell are atheists supposed to win an argument with a person who super imposes a demon's voice on whatever you say....LOL
Dan was so entralled with Annie Laurie, that the FFRF became his new religion. Dan hasn't changed at all. He just switched sides. I often wonder why Dan couldn't have started a new Chapter of the FFRF so he could have stayed near his FIVE children instead of moving half-way across the country. Dan has always been about Dan so nothing has changed about that either. Sad. Pathetic.
@SkiesVibrant Considering his children are grown, I don't see how that matters. He's doing what he enjoys, which includes defending a minority. People move for work often.
@clicb4 IF Dan had moved to Madison recently or even in the last 10 years, I'd agree. However that isn't what happened. He did indeed move across the nation when his children were small and still in school. Make of that whatever you would like, but I'm in possession of information, you aren't. Dan could have easily done whatever work he wanted to closer to his children. He chose to be a parent who 'visits' his children.
@SkiesVibrant Wow. You're the one in possession of information, not me. What a douchebag thing to say, but moving on.
If you're going to criticize Dan for his decisions, then it's only fair you criticize preachers that have done the same thing, truck drivers that are never home and always on the road, etc....because, after all...they could have chosen a different profession, right?
@clicb4 Yep. I can tell you who Dan's parents are, his childrens names, his ex-wife's name. The names of all of his cousins on his mother's side to include his great Aunts and Uncles. I can also tell you where Dan lived in the late 1950's, and where his parents lived until his parents moved to AZ. I know what elementary school and high school he attended and even his favorite prayer. Do you really want to continue this? A truck driver isn't gone for years. Silly comparison.
(2). Yes I would criticize a preacher who was never home. Fair is fair. But Dan wasn't just out of town on business. He moved thousands of miles away PERMANENTLY of his own volition. Dan could have started his own Freethought organization in California, but no, he ran off to Madison, Wisconsin. BTW, he also has another child with Annie Laurie.
While I'm at it, I have some pictures of Dan and his ex-wife at their wedding in Pomona, CA. Care to see it?
@SkiesVibrant I'm not saying I would do the same thing myself. I just don't understand why you care about his actions so much. Why would pictures of him and his ex-wife matter?
@clicb4 The pictures? I included all those things, because you seem to doubt my veracity. Don't misunderstand. I have genuine affection for Dan. My point is that Dan spends a great deal of time trying to convince people that you can be very moral without Deity. But his actions seem not to. If you look at his Website, you'll see he's still selling his book "Godless", yet when he went to a formal debate, all of sudden Dan didn't want the person debating him to quote him.
(2). Dan was selling his book at the debate site. Yet he told the audience, he might have "changed my mind" about what he wrote. If he's still selling the book, then the honest thing to do, would be to pull a book if you no longer believe what you what had said previously.. Dan knows better. He had outstanding parents who taught him right from wrong. I'll be happy to send you a clip of the debate so you can verify what I said is true.
@SkiesVibrant He's released a newer book since "Losing Faith in Faith" called "Godless" which is practically the same book (from my understanding), but with things added to it and things he's changed that he probably wouldn't have said years ago (I think I've even heard him say that). You seem to doubt the man's position and I'm not sure why. I've seen him and met him in person myself.
@clicb4 Did you read what I said? Go look at it again. I said 'Godless'. That's the very book, that he STILL sells despite the fact that he admitted he doesn't agree with some of the things he wrote in it. In fact, to the right in the associated videos, you can see it for yourself. It's the video called "Don't Quote Me Bro!" Go look at his Website. He's still selling it. Meeting Dan is one thing, knowing him is something altogether different. I've known Dan since I was born.
@SkiesVibrant And how have you known him personally since you were born? Yeah, I'm sure he still sells it. He handed me a copy of it personally in December of 2009 and it was pretty new then. And you're going to link me to a Christian video? Like that's not a biased source. Do I find his argumentation odd? Yes, but I don't know his reasons behind it. And I never saw you quote the name of the book in your comment. He never confirmed he'd changed his mind either, btw.
@clicb4 First. The video was indeed posted by a Christian, but no one hog-tied Dan to participate in the debate. That's what Dan does. He debates Christians. Second, the video doesn't have a Christian content itself. It clearly shows Dan objecting to his opponent using his book. He clearly said "I may have changed my mind". If he doesn't stand by his own work, then why have the nerve to sell it as if it was Dan Barker's gospel? That's dishonest & HE STILL SELLS IT.
(a) Why say you may have changed your mind about something you are still selling? I can assure you that Dan knows right from wrong. His parents taught him very well AND they taught me as well. Dan's Dad, Norman, was present when I was baptized. Dan's mom, Patsy, filled the house with incredible beauty when she sang "His Eye is on the Sparrow". I'm the closest thing Dan ever had to a sister, in fact, Dan's mom thought of me as her daughter. I love Dan, but I don't like what he is doing.
(b) In my opinion, Dan took the light out of his mom's eyes. She was never the same. I miss her terribly. He doesn't have to agree with me. I don't care any longer. What I do care about were the countless tears Dan's grandmother cried. Dan was the oldest grandchild, and his actions profoundly affected her. If Dan wans to be an atheist, that's his business. But he wants to take the joy of faith from everyone and it grieved our family seriously. Dan knows that's true.
@SkiesVibrant It sounds to me like you are a Christian that hasn't agreed with Dan since he left religion. You think he's somehow lying about his current viewpoints when that's not what he said in the video (it was very vague). So are you blaming him for being honest with his parents? That's the insinuation that I'm getting. It's all fine and dandy when a Christian influences their family but when an atheist "takes something away", it becomes negative.
@clicb4, Dan strenuously objected to Dr. White quoting his own book. If he stands by his book, then there should be no problem. Dan knows what the rules of engagement are in a formal, moderated debate, so what's he got to hide? Spin it any way you wish, but Dan blew it and he knows it. Dan has been part of my life since I was born. I know him far better than you do. Dan is a 'fundamentalist atheist'. He hasn't changed his behavior, he has just changed sides. He is being dishonest!
@SkiesVibrant It's not about spinning anything to me. It's about not jumping to conclusions about things like so many people tend to do. Why the hell would he be dishonest about being an atheist? That makes no sense whatsoever.
@variablast I actually have some footage of a speech of his I attended a little over a year ago that I've never uploaded (about an hour or two worth). I still keep debating on putting it up, even though it's been a while.
Isn't that funny how atheism happens that way? Everyone thinks atheism is easy, at least the process of becoming an atheist... But it is a hard, depressing, horrific, furious pathway - but it is also probably one of the most uplifting and rewarding of processes, and it's usually entirely personal. It's like how the Christians describe being "born-again." Atheism is very painful at first, but once you've passed through those waters, there's no going back.
I wish atheists would stop calling Christians "brainwashed". Being brainwashed is when you are not allowed to think or reason for yourself and are forced to believe one way only.
Furthermore, atheists convert to Christianity, Christians leave the faith for atheistism, atheists become agnostics, etc, etc all of the time. It's nothing new.
@ZebrasFirst If you're prepared to think and reason for yourself, please tell me: What would falsify christianity for you? What evidence would be sufficient for you as a thinking, reasoning individual to reject christianity?
punnet2, My goodness, how did you find me here? I have a guess, but I'd like an answer to satisfy my curiosity.
Change all of history, remove my brain, and place me on a cookie cutter conveyer belt next to others, and then, and only then, will I become an atheist evolutionist.
punnet2, HAHA!! If you dont like my responses, that's your problem. Remove all of history and remove my brain, and I'll become an atheist evolutionist and join you. Until then, sorry.
@ZebrasFirst Why give an answer to a question I didn't ask? That is not what I would expect from a "thinking, reasoning" person. It is, however, what I would expect from a dodging, dishonest christian.
Pray to your god to give you the courage you presently lack, and try answering again: What evidence would disprove christianity?
punnet2, For the third time, if you want to convert me into being an atheist evolutionist, remove all of history, remove my brain, and then, I will join the monkey train!!! That could only happen three days from never.
@ZebrasFirst Well, that right there in itself seems a little close-minded (three days from "never"). Second of all, evolution is completely separate from Atheism. To deny evolution is like denying gravity. Most people won't argue with gravity though. Why would anyone want to remove history? That's part of what led me AWAY from religion. Same with your brain. You don't want to think for yourself? You're not making much sense, just trying to seem outstanding.
clicb4, U wrote,"evolution is completely separate from Atheism."
- Wrong. What do you think an atheist's replacement for God is?
U wrote,"To deny evolution is like denying gravity."
- Wrong again. I can drop a bowling ball on your head to teach you gravity. But, you can't make a fish turn into an ape to teach The Theory of Evolution.
@ZebrasFirst You claim to be a "reasoning, thinking" person. That would imply you adopted your christian beliefs through a process of sound reasoning and thinking. Please share if that is the case.
Furthermore, a "reasoning, thinking" person is willing to admit he is wrong when presented with new evidence that invalidates his beliefs. Which is why I asked you as a "reasoning, thinking" person to describe what type of evidence would falsify christianity. So for the [count it up]-th time...
@ZebrasFirst Believing someone magically multiplied some bread and fish to feed a multitude? No, I don't see the sound reasoning and thinking there. Please share how you arrived at that belief through sound reasoning and thinking.
So nothing would falsify christianity for you? That indicates you believe simply because you want to believe (if I've misconstrued, please explain); that you've closed your mind to any possibility of being wrong.
punnet2, U wrote,"Believing someone magically multiplied some bread and fish to feed a multitude? No, I don't see the sound reasoning and thinking there."
- Of course you don't - especially when you always go back to your lawyerish ways. I didn't say anything about magic. For the billionth and third time, God is not magic.
U wrote,"you've closed your mind to any possibility of being wrong."
- Have you???
???????????How do you know for certain YOU are right? You don't.
@ZebrasFirst You say god is not magic, yet you provide no logic basis for how such a magical act could have happened.
Are you attempting to answer punnet's question WITH the same question? That's not an answer. That's avoiding the answer. I think you have closed your mind to any possibility of being wrong. That sure is the way it seems. Have I? No, but I really see no way that anyone could prove to me how god exists.
clicb4, U wrote,"You say god is not magic, yet you provide no logic basis for how such a magical act could have happened."
- That's because God isn't magic. Atheisis/evolutionists are the ones who embrace magic. You want to declare all of existence, including the Earth and everything in and out of it as a result of natural means. This natural means obviously has some thinking going on behind it. It doesn't just happen from a natural domino effect. You can believe that, I don't.
clicb4, U wrote,"Are you attempting to answer punnet's question WITH the same question?"
- No. I was wanting him to realize the possibility of HIM being wrong, too. He asked me if I have any doubt or uncertainty about being wrong as if what he believes is the much better alternative. It isn't.
@ZebrasFirst So you're now saying jesus multiplied loaves and fish through natural means? Intriguing. Please explain. Please demonstrate your sound reasoning and thinking that led you to believe this.
And no, unlike you, I have not closed my mind to the possibility of being wrong. I'm willing to admit I'm wrong and change my beliefs based on new evidence. By your own admission, you aren't.
punnet2, U wrote,"So you're now saying jesus multiplied loaves and fish through natural means?"
- No. According to you, Christ performed magic tricks, and that's part of your major goof. Christ performed genuine, reality-defying miracles. He did these to show He REALLY was the Son of God. You can call Him a con artist, hoax, fake, whatever. That would be on you.
punnet2, U wrote,"explain how you arrived- ...-at the belief that jesus performed reality-defying miracles."
- Walking on water, healing the sick, and raising from the dead are all reality-defying miracles. Again, Christ performed these supernatural acts to prove He was who He claimed He was, which is the Son of God.
You have the freedom to scoff, mock, and reject Christ and His doings. Just don't cry later because by then, you would have revealed who you really are.
@ZebrasFirst I'm sorry, but you're dodging the question yet again. I didn't ask why christ performed these supernatural acts; I asked how you -- through sound reasoning and thinking -- came to believe that christ performed these supernatural acts.
As long as you avoid providing proof for these supernatural acts, I -- as a "reasoning, thinking person" will assuredly scoff and reject your beliefs, as well as your claim to being a "reasoning, thinking person".
punnet2, U wrote,"I asked how you- through sound reasoning and thinking- came to believe that christ performed these supernatural acts."
- God and mankind operate on two different levels. God CREATED all of existence supernaturally, not by magic; while mankind CREATED inventions in the physical realm, not by magic.
Example: Christ could walk on water because He's the Son of God; mankind can change the channel with a remote without getting up because of modern technology.
@ZebrasFirst I'm still waiting for you to explain how you arrived at a belief in the supernatural through sound reasoning and thinking.
You claimed to be a "reasoning, thinking" person. Yet when called on to demonstrate this -- in rather simple terms -- you become increasingly evasive.
punnet2, U wrote,"I'm still waiting for you to explain how you arrived at a belief in the supernatural through sound reasoning and thinking."
- Surely, you don't think a house can self-construct itself into existence, do you? If you do, that would be unreasonable and unthinkable because you and I both know that doesn't occur. Why is the Earth any different?
Atheists claim you cannot compare non-living to living, yet, you are the one that told me life started out thru non-life.
Gooberlicious54, Awww...the apeman in denial has followed me here.
Why are you sticking your monkey's paws into another monkey's business? You don't even know what was said, but, you're going to cut in anyway? Typical monkey behavior. No bananas for you!!
Gooberlicious54, HAHAHA!! You wrote,"Chased like a fleeing dog would be more accurate."
HAHAHA!!!! Oh, yeah, Goober, I fear and dodge your intellectual skills, that's why I avoid you at all cost.
Here's a summary of your intellect: "douchebag", "lying weasel", "little weasel"
Oh, yeah, I'm going to run from that, yet, you've conveniently found me here. Gee, how did that happen? I guess you're going to have to chase me off this video, too!! HAHA!!
punnet2, U wrote,"A house can't self-constuct itself...therefore jesus mutiplied loves and rose from the dead?"
- Exactly!! Now you're getting it. A house cannot build itself, just as the Earth cannot form and operate itself. The house requires man (carpenter). The Earth requires a Creator (God).
Again, Christ performed miracles because He really was who He claimed (THE SON OF GOD). People are greatly offended by that.
@ZebrasFirst I'm sorry...you'll have to point out each logical step that brought you from "A house can't construct itself" to "jesus multiplied loaves and rose from the dead". Otherwise, your statement is a worthless non-sequitur and is no more sensible than "a house can't create itself, therefore mohammed flew to heaven on a horse", or "...therefore uri geller bends spoons with his mind", or "...therefore santa visits all the good little children of earth in one night".
punnet2, U wrote,"...you'll have to point out each logical step that brought you from 'A house can't construct itself' to 'jesus multiplied loves and rose from the dead' ."
- I'm wanting for you to see yourself also.
YOU: The Earth created itself thru natural means.
ME: A house cannot build itself; man has to do it, just as God created the Earth.
Point is, if it's impossible for a house to self-build itself into being, why is it logical for you that the Earth did? It's crazy.
@ZebrasFirst Weren't you paying attention? I asked you to demonstrate how you logically deduced "jesus multiplied loaves" from "houses don't create themselves".
For someone who claims to be a "reasoning, thinking person", you sure like to dodge.
If you think house formation and planet formation are comparable processes, your problems are worse than previously thought.
punnet2, U wrote,"If you think house formation and planet formation are comparable processes, your problems are worse than previously thought."
- A house and the Earth may not be CREATED in the same manner but they both require a list of necessary laws. Only a willingly blind fool would pretend to believe things naturally falling together- especially when the Earth is a trillion times more complex than a house.
@ZebrasFirst You repeatedly -- and dishonestly -- accuse me of not knowing the difference between a man and a whale, yet you seem not to understand the difference between a planet and a house. This might be related to your inability to define "kind", despite your repeated use of it. If you had spent even a moment researching how stars and planets are formed, you would quickly realize there is nothing for a creator to do.
And isn't god more complex than earth? So who created him?
@ZebrasFirst So you're incapable of conceiving of a universe without a creator, yet have no qualms whatsoever believing in a god (presmuably more complex than the universe) without a creator. Can't wait to hear how you defend this duplicit thinking.
And try not to forget: You're still going to show us how you logically deduce "jesus multiplied loaves" from "houses don't create themselves", right? Otherwise, please turn in your "reasoning thinking person" badge at your earliest convenience.
punnet2, U wrote,"have no qualms whatsoever believing in a god...without a creator."
- That's correct. Cause and Effect are human comprehensions. Our human minds cannot go past that because we are extremely limited to human reasoning and understanding. However, I can understand God doing things; while you see it occurring naturally on its own. We both accuse the other of the massively impossible.
Gooberlicious54, Okay, I've decided not to continue on with you. You clown too much. So go back up your monkey tree, and pick the fleas of ignorance off your hide. I would be better off having an exchange with an actual chimpanzee than some idiot who thinks he's one. (But is in denial.)
Gooberlicious54, You wrote,"Grow some (BEEP) you gutless little turd."
- See? This is exactly what I'm talking about. That's all you ever say over and over. Again, I'd rather go to the zoo, and try to communicate with an actual chimpanzee than a jerk who thinks he's one (but is in denial of it).
@ZebrasFirst You apply "cause and effect" to the universe to arrive at your belief in god--claiming the universe is too complex to have occurred through natural means, but then fail to apply "cause and effect" to this god--although it would be even more complex than the universe. In other words, you replace the mystery of the universe's origin with a greater mystery, then refuse to investigate that greater mystery.
punnet2, U wrote,"you replace the mystery of the universe's origins with a greater mystery, then refuse to investigate that greater mystery."
- Wow. You admitting "the mystery of the universe's origin" shows you do not believe in Self-Creation after all. Good job. I'd rather accept your honesty of not knowing than your arrogance of knowing for certain.
U said,"fail to apply 'cause and effect' to this god..."
- That's correct. But I did not fail, Cause and Effect does not apply to God.
@ZebrasFirst I never said I believed in self-creation. I've said before I don't know. (Whether or not I've told you that specifically I can't remember, so I won't bother to ask this time if you were paying attention...which you probably weren't.)
So in order to "prove" god, you apply cause and effect to everything except to the thing you want to prove. This amounts to a logical fallacy. Let's see if you can figure out which one. (If not, I'll tell you in the next round of posts).
punnet2, No, because along with everything else, God created the physical Cause and Effect as well. Think about it! The inventor of time, space, matter, cells, and all of existence is beyond human comprehension!!
Look at it like this: Cartoonists create other worlds thru their creativity. Let's take Jon Arbuckle and his cat, Garfield, and his dog, Odie, for example. Even though those characters exist in a ficticious world, they can never know the mind of man. Nor we, God.
Gooberlicious54, Surely, you don't think a Monday-hating, lasanga-loving, orange cat named, Garfield, is real do you? Wait! Don't answer that... Not to crush your heart, but....Curious George isn't real, either!!
@ZebrasFirst christianity is the result of people taking the Bronze Age equivalent of a cartoon seriously. Your god is a character in a fictitious world.
punnet2, Only an ape humanoid creature who thinks he's related to cabbage will think an actor (Heston) is the same person he portrayed in his scientific documentary ("Planet of the Apes".)
@ZebrasFirst "Cause and Effect does not apply to God."
Then stop trying to use it to prove a god, that's where the logical fallacy takes place.
And you're not as stupid as you act, you ALREADY KNOW THIS.
Now, instead of making claims about the attributes of your god, how about providing the evidence for its existence...the evidence you earlier claimed to have?
punnet2, U wrote,"...demonstrate how you logically deduced 'jesus multiplied loaves' from 'houses don't create themselves' ".
- Well, Jesus is the Son of God. You deny both.
A house cannot build itself. You accept that.
Yet, you also accept the Earth self-creating itself into existence.
This is how I go from miracle to the unplausible: reason and logic. The miracles of birth, life, and death are NOT without reason. You seem to think so.
@ZebrasFirst I accept a house cannot build itself. But I still do not see how you logically conclude "jesus multiplied loaves" from that premise, nor even "jesus is the son of god".
"houses don't build themselves" -> "jesus" remains a logical leap until you specify the intermediate deductive steps.
You claim to be a "reasoning, thinking person", yet pathetically avoid demonstrating your "reasoning, thinking" process when I've asked you to now multiple times.
Gooberlicious54, If you promise to calm down and stop using insults over and over, I will be serious with you. I've given up on you about twice. I already know you think I'm stupid and worthless. You don't have to be saying it over and over like a confused parrot.
Are you willing to be serious or are we gonna remain in the daycare level?
Aww, poor little baby - you can dish it out, but whine like a bitch when it's flung back at you.
Grow up.
"I've given up on you about twice"
Given up? You've fled our "debates" EIGHT TIMES now! Every time I ask you to produce the evidence for a god you claimed to have, you either fling more insults or play the evasion game.
"You don't have to be saying it over and over like a confused parrot"
punnet2, U wrote,"I have not closed my mind to the possibility of being wrong. I'm willing to admit I'm wrong and change my beliefs based on new evidence."
- Why new evidence? Ancient clues isn't convincing enough for you? You're smart enough to know the Earth and other planets did not formed and aligned themselves. That alone is an awesome, spectacular, miraculous event.
Furthermore, before getting into the scientific things, common sense doesn't hurt.
@ZebrasFirst Why new evidence? Because new evidence shows us what we were wrong about before. New evidence is how we went from a geocentric model to a heliocentric model, for example. A "reasoning, thinking person" revises his beliefs based on new information when it comes to light.
I've told you that i'm not close-minded and am willing to admit I'm wrong with sufficient evidence. So for the [alot + 1]-th time, what evidence would you (reasoning, thinking) require to admit you're wrong?
punnet2, U wrote,"what evidence would you...require to admit you're wrong?"
- I've answerd that already. It's not my fault you don't like my responses. Change all of world history and remove my brain, and then, I will join you in being an atheist/evolutionist. But, that woluld be as impossible as Self-creation, fish evolving to apes, and cabbage cousins.
@ZebrasFirst You've not answered it already. It is your fault I don't like your responses, when you don't actually respond to the question asked.
Changing world history and removing your brain is not an example of evidence. New evidence in astronomy forced us to admit we were wrong about heliocentrism, and adopt geocentrism.
A mammalian fossil in the pre-Cambrian stratum would serve as evidence falsifying evolution.
So what evidence (new information) would falsify your christian beliefs?
punnet2, U wrote,"Changing world history and removing your brain is not an example of evidence."
- My whole point in saying that is, in order for me to doubt or dismiss the Bible, I would have to be in denial of mathematics. You can't cheat math. You can't lie math. You can't change math. The Bible is the same way. You're basically asking me what would falsify mathematics. Nothing.
@ZebrasFirst LOL - you compare the bible to mathematics? The bible is just a book; a poorly compiled, poorly copied and poorly translated book, which has only been around for 2,000 years.
Mathetmatics can be applied in an observable, testable manner. In what comparable way can your bible be applied?
Furthermore, mathematical claims are in fact falsifiable. So once again: what would falsify the bible for you? Here's yoru chance to show you're a "reasoning, thinking person".
punnet2, U wrote,"LOL- you compare the bible to mathematics?"
- Yes. Surely, you do not think mathematics was man-made? Mathematics existed way before the existence of man. Man only discovered it because he's intelligent.
@ZebrasFirst Mathetmatics isn't man-made, but the bible assuredly is; it's just a book, which didn't exist in any form you're familiar with until the 4th century.
Different civilizations have developed mathematics independently. The same cannot be said for the bible. Rather cultures have all developed their own religious myths, and the biblical one just happens to be the one which infected your brain.
The bible is not in any sense comparable to mathematics.
punnet2, - That's not true. There were Christians as far back as the 1st Century.
U wrote,"Different civilizations have developed mathematics independently."
- Doesn't matter who or what or when math was "developed", I'm saying it always existed. Say millions of years ago when dinosaurs roamed the Earth, let's say two Brontosauruses were drinking water. The number 2 doesn't exist because math wasn't developed yet? Nope.
@ZebrasFirst Yes, little one. There were christards back then, but the bible itself was not put together until the 4th century. Weren't you paying attention?
I'm not contesting that math has always existed; that is what distinguishes it from the bible. Different civilizations have developed mathematics; different civilizations have not independently developed the bible.
punnet2, When God FIRST began to create the physical world, the Bible came into existence, otherwise, why would there be Christians before the actual books came together?
I'm just saying that the Bible and math are two forms of solid, unbreakable systems. And only a human being believing he's an ape will try to dismantle them.
Christians can be very UGLY when it comes to defending their invisible magic man even to the point of murder, torture, wars etc. Check the history of how Christianity came about. Jesus would have been dissapointed if he was alive today. Jesus had no church, no religion, no money, hardly any posessions. Look at the contrast of Christians today and when Jesus was around.
I like Bill Maher's testimony better. He used to be a Catholic but something important happened that made him realize his religious beliefs were all B.S. - he graduated 6th grade. lol
Now the question of "Once saved always saved" is really going to come to bare. Has he now actually blasphemed the Holy Spirit of Yahushua declaring that the works of Yahuah are not? Or while confessing and bowing will he look face to face with his redeemer and know he is forgiven because he meant it as a young man whether he did as an older man or not?
Dan Barker, you are a very stupid man! The fool says in his heart that there is no God. The idea is to be prepared at all times because Jesus can come at any time!!
I am 27 and I am also a Christian turned Atheist. Dan Barker is a great inspiration for people like me and I am grateful we have him. Dan is totally right to about how every generation thinks the world is going to end at any minute and Jesus is going to come back. That type of mental abuse use to scare me as a child. :-( That type of crap is still being preached, but I am old enough to see it for the pure CRAP it is.
I am proud to be an atheist and I think Dan Barker rocks.
@Zeeboe Its only mental abuse if you prefer to live in the world. If the idea of a loving and powerful redeemer who wants to rescue you from the curse you're under is mental torture then you seem to prefer the curse.
Don't waste your time trying to convince an atheist that God exists. Let them find out the Truth on their own. However, I do ask that you still pray for them.
Jesus said that only the sinful skeptics will seek a sign (which is proof) and none will be given, except for the Resurrection. If you hardened your heart against God, you will never see the wonderful forest before you. Put away your pre-suppositions and read the Word with an open mind & heart and you will see the message. Christians do not have to convince anyone; we just share the message. God bless you, friend.
That is the "Apologetics Creed". Don't make the mistake of thinking a defense or providing an answer for faith is the same as providing proof... there is a big difference there. Remember my last comment: Jesus said that no sign (proof) will be given, except the sign of Jonah. Either you believe or you don't. If you look for further proof, you will be disappointed because only the skeptic continues to search. Belief brings relief. God bless you.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
"I emptied out all of the bathwater and found there was no baby there"
I hope that all of you atheists who look to this man as a shining example of honesty consider this statement by Dan Barker for what it really means... no baby there. His identification with Christianity was never genuine, it was a lie. His confession was false, he never knew Christ, and as a result he was tossed back and forth by every wave and blown about by the wind. He had no foundation in Christ.
@clicb4 No, sorry, clicb4. I'm simply pointing out what Dan Barker has confessed to. That's not judging, it's simply allowing him to speak and considering what his words mean.
If you disagree with my interpretation, that's fine. But wouldn't you have to judge me, i.e., the correctness of my words, to come to that conclusion? Nowhere does Scripture tell Christians not to judge (unless you yank some words of Christ out of context); it tells us to judge rightly. See especially 1 John 2:19
@boan000 - You can quote me verses all day. It's not gonna change the fact that you are judging another person for their beliefs. You only say he never believed because of some stupid verse in the bible which Christians tend to cling to and ignore other verses that they make excuses for when they are equally as ridiculous.
clicb4, U wrote,"Saying that is like me saying you are not a Christian because you are judging others." to boan000's comment.
- Well, Christ said there would be fakes to come in His name. Secondly, Christ never said,"Do not judge.", that's a common Bible misconception. Christ said not to judge like a hypocrite. After all, there's a book in the Bible entitled, JUDGES.
@boan000 What an example of circular thinking! I go for the no Jesus (no baby) part, but I never stopped believing in his Father. I became convinced that Jesus was a construct of Constantine, and flushed Christianity out of my brain. You can tell me I was never a true Christian, but I won't believe you.
@boan000 I primarily became convinced of this because of my readings in a book called Oahspe, which says that Constantine created Christianity as we now know it. Also a book called "Antiquity Unveiled" backed up this philosophy. Not an easy thing to change your way of thinking that you grew up with. You are right in one respect, if I had 'truly known him'..., but how could I if he was just a mythical figure? One point for you.
@Cootabux "You cannot say I was never really Xian on the premise that "we would have never left if I really knew him."
I didn't say it, the Apostle John did under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Your quarrel isn't with me, but with the authority of Scripture. Regarding the injustice of hell, if you truly understand how abominable our sin is, and the infinite offense it is to an perfectly holy God, you would not see it as unjust. Forgiveness is offered in Christ to all who repent & believe
I don't care who said it, and I have no quarrel with anyone. I simply pose questions and comments based on my experience and what I've learned of scripture.
If I truly understood how abominable our sin is???? I can't wait to hear this! Please feel free to explain how terrible we are! But it wouldn't make any difference bcuz no matter how "bad" someone is, nothing warrants hell! Hell isn't punishment. It's sadistic cruelty, only for the sake of causing suffering! It's evil in itself!
And you should keep this in mind. My conversion (being Born Again), came from an emotional decision, based on a "need to believe." My deconversion was a rational & thoughtful one, coming from 3 yrs of study into scripture. The biblical god was evil!, it's just that simple. I oppose all evil, regardless of how its dressed.
Anything or anyone who kills innocent women & children, advocates slavery & treats women as property, is no god to me. He's only a Tyrant who rules by fear.
@Cootabux "keep this in mind. My conversion (being Born Again), came from an emotional decision"
Sadly, you seem to be a victim of the modern gospel. The new birth is an act of God, not by man's will (Jn 1:13) . The New Birth (Jn 3, 1 Pet 1:23), did you have any say in your birth? The 1st resurrection (Rev 20:5-6), do you have anything to do with your resurrection? made alive in Christ (1 Cor 15:22), can you make yourself alive?
Dead men are dead, repentance & faith are given by God.
You convinced yourself that Jesus Christ did not even exist, and somehow you are convinced that you were a true Christian? Jesus said that eternal life (the possession of which defines Christianity) is this: that they know God and Jesus Christ whom God has sent. If you had ever known him there is no way that you could become convinced he did not exist. in fact, if you had truly known him, there is no way you could turn your back on him.
Anytime someone sees thru this religion, you people go into this, "he never was a true Christian" routine!!
And speaking of honesty, and I most certainly can, it takes becoming honest with ones self to take that 1st step into asking the hard questions, then going after the answer.
I was a Christian for over 50 years before I deconverted, which was several years ago. That transition took many years though. It started with me studying scripture deeply for the 1st time. I can't live a lie
@boan000 if his testimony was not good, then no ones is, i could say the same thing with muslims or jews that they were not really muslim or jew because they stopped beleiving. logic, get with it
@boan000 if his beleif was false, how can you say anyones elses is true? or is it that anyone who disagrees with your PATHETIC fucking fairytale is lying or doesn't know what they are talking about
@blazereef "if his beleif was false, how can you say anyones elses is true?"
It's simple:
They went out from us, but they did not really belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us; but their going showed that none of them belonged to us.
@boan000 I hate to break it to you, but quoting a bible verse proves absolutely nothing when you haven't proven the book itself is reliable or demonstrated that a god exists. It's just words, phrases, and numbers.
@clicb4 " you, but quoting a bible verse proves absolutely nothing when you haven't proven the book itself is reliable"
Hi clicb4, the Bible is God's Word. Its prophetic perfection is absolute proof of that. Only an omniscient God can declare the end from the beginning, and bring about the fulfillment of the prophesies he has spoken through his prophets and through his Son.
@boan000 that is such a stupid comment. The bible is full of errors and contradictions and lots of fairy tales. This is typically of early human beliefs of the earths creation. Those early humans did not have the science and information that we have today. Ironically religions greatest achilles heel is information and knowledge.
@angellicvoices you wrote, "that is such a stupid comment. The bible is full of errors and contradictions and lots of fairy tales"
If your authority is the skeptic's web sites, and you do not do any independent research, I can understand why you'd think that. However, every purported contradiction is due to a lack of contextual understanding, poor hermeneutics, translational issues, or logical fallacies on the part of the skeptics.
@boan000 Why do you Christians quote from a questionable and flawed source continuosly? Certainly brainwashed because you cant quote from any other books other than one thats claimed by archaic humans as the only Godly source. If there was such a powerful and perfect God, why on earth would it decide that a small group of desert people decide what to write? How do we know that these men had God talking in their ears when they were writing? Its all rubbish.
@angellicvoices "Why do you Christians quote from a questionable and flawed source continuosly?"
The Bible's not flawed. Again, its prophetic perfection is absolute proof that it is inspired by an omniscient and omnipotent God who has declared the end from the beginning.
As long as you are looking for reasons not to believe, the enemy of your soul will be sure to provide them for you. However, the Bible, God's Word, has withstood thousands of years of scrutiny and attacks from skeptics.
Luke 8: "And the ones on the rock are those who, when they hear the word, receive it with joy. But these have no root; they believe for a while, and in time of testing fall away".
I would like to correct his statement that every Christian thinks the world is going to come any minute. The Bible tells us to watch but no one in heaven or earth knows the day or hour, even the angels.
@HeatherOfOz - Yeah, I'd fall away in a time of testing if someone told me to sacrifice my child too...like god did in the bible. He wasn't saying that Christians know when the world is going to end...just that they are always aware that it COULD end at any moment. I did a video about the end times recently and how I thought it was all ridiculous.
@HeatherOfOz - My point was that a god that would command such a thing to test someone is mentally unstable. I know human beings that would never ask for any kind of loyalty test, especially not one that involved sacrifice.
@clicb4 what a childish remark for you to make. I did not hurl accusations for a start and I did not run. I simply stated the obvious and left it at that. What do you want me to do? Keep checking in to argue the point with you? Do you think I have anything else to say to someone obviously not interested? I have other interests besides arguing with people.
@HeatherOfOz - Obviously you can't take me replying to your comment with logic. I logically reply, you accuse me of just not wanting to see your point of view...completely ignoring what I said, and then say "end of discussion" basically. How am I childish for that? You wanna say something, but not keep replying to it? I don't get it. I just responded to the way you acted and what I'm used to seeing. I replied to your comment on my channel, but would rather you comment on the video itself.
Fuck Santander
dirtydonki 2 months ago
Oprah has nice tits.
dickhead2905 4 months ago
Dan Barker deconversion
DynamoWorks 5 months ago
Dan has shown the kind of courage that evangelical Christians claim to aspire to. What is wrong when a person looks at the data and simply cannot draw the "popular" conclusion?
W1I2L3L4ARD 5 months ago
Dan has a really high IQ (99th percentile) and a very extreme way of thinking. I think as a fundamentalist Christian he had walled off the rational/logical side of his brain- which is his stronger suit. Once he tasted reason for the first time, of course he was going to be just as extreme in his views, just now in a different direction. Today he uses MAINLY only the rational side of his mind and not the emotional. However as believers, I think we need to have a healthy balance of both sides.
XugaXuga88 6 months ago
Christians are taught to believe atheists are instruments of the actual devil. How the hell are atheists supposed to win an argument with a person who super imposes a demon's voice on whatever you say....LOL
iamborghini1 1 year ago 8
Dan was so entralled with Annie Laurie, that the FFRF became his new religion. Dan hasn't changed at all. He just switched sides. I often wonder why Dan couldn't have started a new Chapter of the FFRF so he could have stayed near his FIVE children instead of moving half-way across the country. Dan has always been about Dan so nothing has changed about that either. Sad. Pathetic.
SkiesVibrant 1 year ago
@SkiesVibrant Considering his children are grown, I don't see how that matters. He's doing what he enjoys, which includes defending a minority. People move for work often.
clicb4 1 year ago
@clicb4 IF Dan had moved to Madison recently or even in the last 10 years, I'd agree. However that isn't what happened. He did indeed move across the nation when his children were small and still in school. Make of that whatever you would like, but I'm in possession of information, you aren't. Dan could have easily done whatever work he wanted to closer to his children. He chose to be a parent who 'visits' his children.
SkiesVibrant 1 year ago
@SkiesVibrant Wow. You're the one in possession of information, not me. What a douchebag thing to say, but moving on.
If you're going to criticize Dan for his decisions, then it's only fair you criticize preachers that have done the same thing, truck drivers that are never home and always on the road, etc....because, after all...they could have chosen a different profession, right?
clicb4 1 year ago
@clicb4 Yep. I can tell you who Dan's parents are, his childrens names, his ex-wife's name. The names of all of his cousins on his mother's side to include his great Aunts and Uncles. I can also tell you where Dan lived in the late 1950's, and where his parents lived until his parents moved to AZ. I know what elementary school and high school he attended and even his favorite prayer. Do you really want to continue this? A truck driver isn't gone for years. Silly comparison.
SkiesVibrant 1 year ago
(2). Yes I would criticize a preacher who was never home. Fair is fair. But Dan wasn't just out of town on business. He moved thousands of miles away PERMANENTLY of his own volition. Dan could have started his own Freethought organization in California, but no, he ran off to Madison, Wisconsin. BTW, he also has another child with Annie Laurie.
While I'm at it, I have some pictures of Dan and his ex-wife at their wedding in Pomona, CA. Care to see it?
SkiesVibrant 1 year ago
@SkiesVibrant I'm not saying I would do the same thing myself. I just don't understand why you care about his actions so much. Why would pictures of him and his ex-wife matter?
clicb4 1 year ago
@clicb4 The pictures? I included all those things, because you seem to doubt my veracity. Don't misunderstand. I have genuine affection for Dan. My point is that Dan spends a great deal of time trying to convince people that you can be very moral without Deity. But his actions seem not to. If you look at his Website, you'll see he's still selling his book "Godless", yet when he went to a formal debate, all of sudden Dan didn't want the person debating him to quote him.
SkiesVibrant 1 year ago
(2). Dan was selling his book at the debate site. Yet he told the audience, he might have "changed my mind" about what he wrote. If he's still selling the book, then the honest thing to do, would be to pull a book if you no longer believe what you what had said previously.. Dan knows better. He had outstanding parents who taught him right from wrong. I'll be happy to send you a clip of the debate so you can verify what I said is true.
Blessings.
SkiesVibrant 1 year ago
@SkiesVibrant He's released a newer book since "Losing Faith in Faith" called "Godless" which is practically the same book (from my understanding), but with things added to it and things he's changed that he probably wouldn't have said years ago (I think I've even heard him say that). You seem to doubt the man's position and I'm not sure why. I've seen him and met him in person myself.
clicb4 1 year ago
@clicb4 Did you read what I said? Go look at it again. I said 'Godless'. That's the very book, that he STILL sells despite the fact that he admitted he doesn't agree with some of the things he wrote in it. In fact, to the right in the associated videos, you can see it for yourself. It's the video called "Don't Quote Me Bro!" Go look at his Website. He's still selling it. Meeting Dan is one thing, knowing him is something altogether different. I've known Dan since I was born.
SkiesVibrant 1 year ago
@SkiesVibrant And how have you known him personally since you were born? Yeah, I'm sure he still sells it. He handed me a copy of it personally in December of 2009 and it was pretty new then. And you're going to link me to a Christian video? Like that's not a biased source. Do I find his argumentation odd? Yes, but I don't know his reasons behind it. And I never saw you quote the name of the book in your comment. He never confirmed he'd changed his mind either, btw.
clicb4 1 year ago
@clicb4 First. The video was indeed posted by a Christian, but no one hog-tied Dan to participate in the debate. That's what Dan does. He debates Christians. Second, the video doesn't have a Christian content itself. It clearly shows Dan objecting to his opponent using his book. He clearly said "I may have changed my mind". If he doesn't stand by his own work, then why have the nerve to sell it as if it was Dan Barker's gospel? That's dishonest & HE STILL SELLS IT.
SkiesVibrant 1 year ago
(a) Why say you may have changed your mind about something you are still selling? I can assure you that Dan knows right from wrong. His parents taught him very well AND they taught me as well. Dan's Dad, Norman, was present when I was baptized. Dan's mom, Patsy, filled the house with incredible beauty when she sang "His Eye is on the Sparrow". I'm the closest thing Dan ever had to a sister, in fact, Dan's mom thought of me as her daughter. I love Dan, but I don't like what he is doing.
SkiesVibrant 1 year ago
(b) In my opinion, Dan took the light out of his mom's eyes. She was never the same. I miss her terribly. He doesn't have to agree with me. I don't care any longer. What I do care about were the countless tears Dan's grandmother cried. Dan was the oldest grandchild, and his actions profoundly affected her. If Dan wans to be an atheist, that's his business. But he wants to take the joy of faith from everyone and it grieved our family seriously. Dan knows that's true.
SkiesVibrant 1 year ago
@SkiesVibrant It sounds to me like you are a Christian that hasn't agreed with Dan since he left religion. You think he's somehow lying about his current viewpoints when that's not what he said in the video (it was very vague). So are you blaming him for being honest with his parents? That's the insinuation that I'm getting. It's all fine and dandy when a Christian influences their family but when an atheist "takes something away", it becomes negative.
clicb4 1 year ago
@clicb4, Dan strenuously objected to Dr. White quoting his own book. If he stands by his book, then there should be no problem. Dan knows what the rules of engagement are in a formal, moderated debate, so what's he got to hide? Spin it any way you wish, but Dan blew it and he knows it. Dan has been part of my life since I was born. I know him far better than you do. Dan is a 'fundamentalist atheist'. He hasn't changed his behavior, he has just changed sides. He is being dishonest!
SkiesVibrant 1 year ago
@SkiesVibrant It's not about spinning anything to me. It's about not jumping to conclusions about things like so many people tend to do. Why the hell would he be dishonest about being an atheist? That makes no sense whatsoever.
clicb4 1 year ago
@variablast I actually have some footage of a speech of his I attended a little over a year ago that I've never uploaded (about an hour or two worth). I still keep debating on putting it up, even though it's been a while.
clicb4 1 year ago
"For me it was a five year struggle..."
Isn't that funny how atheism happens that way? Everyone thinks atheism is easy, at least the process of becoming an atheist... But it is a hard, depressing, horrific, furious pathway - but it is also probably one of the most uplifting and rewarding of processes, and it's usually entirely personal. It's like how the Christians describe being "born-again." Atheism is very painful at first, but once you've passed through those waters, there's no going back.
shamantics 1 year ago
I wish atheists would stop calling Christians "brainwashed". Being brainwashed is when you are not allowed to think or reason for yourself and are forced to believe one way only.
Furthermore, atheists convert to Christianity, Christians leave the faith for atheistism, atheists become agnostics, etc, etc all of the time. It's nothing new.
ZebrasFirst 1 year ago
@ZebrasFirst If you're prepared to think and reason for yourself, please tell me: What would falsify christianity for you? What evidence would be sufficient for you as a thinking, reasoning individual to reject christianity?
punnet2 1 year ago
punnet2, My goodness, how did you find me here? I have a guess, but I'd like an answer to satisfy my curiosity.
Change all of history, remove my brain, and place me on a cookie cutter conveyer belt next to others, and then, and only then, will I become an atheist evolutionist.
ZebrasFirst 1 year ago
@ZebrasFirst That's not what i asked, Z-bra. I forgot I have to slow things down so you can keep up....
What evidence would falsify christianity for you, if you are the thinking, reasoning person you claim to be?
punnet2 1 year ago
punnet2, HAHA!! If you dont like my responses, that's your problem. Remove all of history and remove my brain, and I'll become an atheist evolutionist and join you. Until then, sorry.
ZebrasFirst 1 year ago
@ZebrasFirst Why give an answer to a question I didn't ask? That is not what I would expect from a "thinking, reasoning" person. It is, however, what I would expect from a dodging, dishonest christian.
Pray to your god to give you the courage you presently lack, and try answering again: What evidence would disprove christianity?
punnet2 1 year ago
punnet2, For the third time, if you want to convert me into being an atheist evolutionist, remove all of history, remove my brain, and then, I will join the monkey train!!! That could only happen three days from never.
ZebrasFirst 1 year ago
@ZebrasFirst Well, that right there in itself seems a little close-minded (three days from "never"). Second of all, evolution is completely separate from Atheism. To deny evolution is like denying gravity. Most people won't argue with gravity though. Why would anyone want to remove history? That's part of what led me AWAY from religion. Same with your brain. You don't want to think for yourself? You're not making much sense, just trying to seem outstanding.
clicb4 1 year ago
clicb4, U wrote,"evolution is completely separate from Atheism."
- Wrong. What do you think an atheist's replacement for God is?
U wrote,"To deny evolution is like denying gravity."
- Wrong again. I can drop a bowling ball on your head to teach you gravity. But, you can't make a fish turn into an ape to teach The Theory of Evolution.
ZebrasFirst 1 year ago
@ZebrasFirst Zebra for the [add 1 to however many times you've already dodged]-th time, what EVIDENCE would falsify christianity for you?
Or by avoiding the question, are you admitting you have no evidence in favor of your beliefs, and believe simply because you want to?
punnet2 1 year ago
punnet2, U wrote, "are you admitting you have no evidence in favor of your beliefs, and believe simply because you want to?"
- Now, why would you say something as strange as that? You know I'm not an evolutionist. And after all this time...
ZebrasFirst 1 year ago
@ZebrasFirst You claim to be a "reasoning, thinking" person. That would imply you adopted your christian beliefs through a process of sound reasoning and thinking. Please share if that is the case.
Furthermore, a "reasoning, thinking" person is willing to admit he is wrong when presented with new evidence that invalidates his beliefs. Which is why I asked you as a "reasoning, thinking" person to describe what type of evidence would falsify christianity. So for the [count it up]-th time...
punnet2 1 year ago
punnet2, U wrote,"you adopted your christian beliefs thru a process of sound reasoning and thinking."
- True. I believe Christ fed a multitude with fish; not that we came from fish. That is sound reasoning and thinking, don'tcha think?
U con't,"...what type of evidence would falsify christianity."
- Not The Theory of Evolution. So far, that's the best atheists got....unfortunately. Therefore, nothing.
ZebrasFirst 1 year ago
@ZebrasFirst Believing someone magically multiplied some bread and fish to feed a multitude? No, I don't see the sound reasoning and thinking there. Please share how you arrived at that belief through sound reasoning and thinking.
So nothing would falsify christianity for you? That indicates you believe simply because you want to believe (if I've misconstrued, please explain); that you've closed your mind to any possibility of being wrong.
That isn't a "thinking, reasoning" person.
punnet2 1 year ago
punnet2, U wrote,"Believing someone magically multiplied some bread and fish to feed a multitude? No, I don't see the sound reasoning and thinking there."
- Of course you don't - especially when you always go back to your lawyerish ways. I didn't say anything about magic. For the billionth and third time, God is not magic.
U wrote,"you've closed your mind to any possibility of being wrong."
- Have you???
???????????How do you know for certain YOU are right? You don't.
ZebrasFirst 1 year ago
@ZebrasFirst You say god is not magic, yet you provide no logic basis for how such a magical act could have happened.
Are you attempting to answer punnet's question WITH the same question? That's not an answer. That's avoiding the answer. I think you have closed your mind to any possibility of being wrong. That sure is the way it seems. Have I? No, but I really see no way that anyone could prove to me how god exists.
clicb4 1 year ago
clicb4, U wrote,"You say god is not magic, yet you provide no logic basis for how such a magical act could have happened."
- That's because God isn't magic. Atheisis/evolutionists are the ones who embrace magic. You want to declare all of existence, including the Earth and everything in and out of it as a result of natural means. This natural means obviously has some thinking going on behind it. It doesn't just happen from a natural domino effect. You can believe that, I don't.
ZebrasFirst 1 year ago
clicb4, U wrote,"Are you attempting to answer punnet's question WITH the same question?"
- No. I was wanting him to realize the possibility of HIM being wrong, too. He asked me if I have any doubt or uncertainty about being wrong as if what he believes is the much better alternative. It isn't.
ZebrasFirst 1 year ago
@ZebrasFirst So you're now saying jesus multiplied loaves and fish through natural means? Intriguing. Please explain. Please demonstrate your sound reasoning and thinking that led you to believe this.
And no, unlike you, I have not closed my mind to the possibility of being wrong. I'm willing to admit I'm wrong and change my beliefs based on new evidence. By your own admission, you aren't.
punnet2 1 year ago
punnet2, U wrote,"So you're now saying jesus multiplied loaves and fish through natural means?"
- No. According to you, Christ performed magic tricks, and that's part of your major goof. Christ performed genuine, reality-defying miracles. He did these to show He REALLY was the Son of God. You can call Him a con artist, hoax, fake, whatever. That would be on you.
ZebrasFirst 1 year ago
@ZebrasFirst Call it magic; call it "reality-defying miracles". Not sure why you're equivocating like this -- other than to dodge.
So please: explain how you arrived -- through sound reasoning and thinking--at the belief that jesus performed reality-defying miracles.
punnet2 1 year ago
punnet2, U wrote,"explain how you arrived- ...-at the belief that jesus performed reality-defying miracles."
- Walking on water, healing the sick, and raising from the dead are all reality-defying miracles. Again, Christ performed these supernatural acts to prove He was who He claimed He was, which is the Son of God.
You have the freedom to scoff, mock, and reject Christ and His doings. Just don't cry later because by then, you would have revealed who you really are.
ZebrasFirst 1 year ago
@ZebrasFirst I'm sorry, but you're dodging the question yet again. I didn't ask why christ performed these supernatural acts; I asked how you -- through sound reasoning and thinking -- came to believe that christ performed these supernatural acts.
As long as you avoid providing proof for these supernatural acts, I -- as a "reasoning, thinking person" will assuredly scoff and reject your beliefs, as well as your claim to being a "reasoning, thinking person".
So for the [?]-th time....
punnet2 1 year ago
punnet2, U wrote,"I asked how you- through sound reasoning and thinking- came to believe that christ performed these supernatural acts."
- God and mankind operate on two different levels. God CREATED all of existence supernaturally, not by magic; while mankind CREATED inventions in the physical realm, not by magic.
Example: Christ could walk on water because He's the Son of God; mankind can change the channel with a remote without getting up because of modern technology.
ZebrasFirst 1 year ago
@ZebrasFirst I'm still waiting for you to explain how you arrived at a belief in the supernatural through sound reasoning and thinking.
You claimed to be a "reasoning, thinking" person. Yet when called on to demonstrate this -- in rather simple terms -- you become increasingly evasive.
So for the [way too many already]-th time...
punnet2 1 year ago
punnet2, U wrote,"I'm still waiting for you to explain how you arrived at a belief in the supernatural through sound reasoning and thinking."
- Surely, you don't think a house can self-construct itself into existence, do you? If you do, that would be unreasonable and unthinkable because you and I both know that doesn't occur. Why is the Earth any different?
Atheists claim you cannot compare non-living to living, yet, you are the one that told me life started out thru non-life.
ZebrasFirst 1 year ago
@ZebrasFirst Yes, let's compare a contructed domicile to a PLANET.
Falied analogy is fail (big surprise there!)
Now, about the evidence you claimed to have...
Stop evading like a sackless maggot and either present it or admit you don't have any.
Gooberlicious54 1 year ago
Gooberlicious54, Awww...the apeman in denial has followed me here.
Why are you sticking your monkey's paws into another monkey's business? You don't even know what was said, but, you're going to cut in anyway? Typical monkey behavior. No bananas for you!!
ZebrasFirst 1 year ago
@ZebrasFirst "Awww...the apeman in denial has followed me here."
Chased like a fleeing dog would be more accurate.
You made claims of evidence for a god, then fled with your tail between your legs.
Like you are doing now, little weasel.
Gooberlicious54 1 year ago
Gooberlicious54, HAHAHA!! You wrote,"Chased like a fleeing dog would be more accurate."
HAHAHA!!!! Oh, yeah, Goober, I fear and dodge your intellectual skills, that's why I avoid you at all cost.
Here's a summary of your intellect: "douchebag", "lying weasel", "little weasel"
Oh, yeah, I'm going to run from that, yet, you've conveniently found me here. Gee, how did that happen? I guess you're going to have to chase me off this video, too!! HAHA!!
ZebrasFirst 1 year ago
@ZebrasFirst "you are the one that told me life started out thru non-life"
How easily these Creationist child molesters lie.
YOU are the one claiming life came from non-life...you've claimed over and over again that your god made humans from DIRT.
Are you now going to claim DIRT is a living thing??
What a complete dumbass.
Gooberlicious54 1 year ago
@ZebrasFirst "Surely, you don't think a house can self-construct itself into existence, do you?"
YOU do - just change the analogy and call the house God.
Lying, two-faced Creationist weasels are so easy to pwn...this guy does it to himself!
Gooberlicious54 1 year ago
@ZebrasFirst A house can't self-construct itself...therefore jesus multiplied loaves and rose from the dead?
When you're ready to demonstrate your sound reasoning and thinking, let me know.
punnet2 1 year ago
punnet2, U wrote,"A house can't self-constuct itself...therefore jesus mutiplied loves and rose from the dead?"
- Exactly!! Now you're getting it. A house cannot build itself, just as the Earth cannot form and operate itself. The house requires man (carpenter). The Earth requires a Creator (God).
Again, Christ performed miracles because He really was who He claimed (THE SON OF GOD). People are greatly offended by that.
ZebrasFirst 1 year ago
@ZebrasFirst I'm sorry...you'll have to point out each logical step that brought you from "A house can't construct itself" to "jesus multiplied loaves and rose from the dead". Otherwise, your statement is a worthless non-sequitur and is no more sensible than "a house can't create itself, therefore mohammed flew to heaven on a horse", or "...therefore uri geller bends spoons with his mind", or "...therefore santa visits all the good little children of earth in one night".
punnet2 1 year ago
punnet2, U wrote,"...you'll have to point out each logical step that brought you from 'A house can't construct itself' to 'jesus multiplied loves and rose from the dead' ."
- I'm wanting for you to see yourself also.
YOU: The Earth created itself thru natural means.
ME: A house cannot build itself; man has to do it, just as God created the Earth.
Point is, if it's impossible for a house to self-build itself into being, why is it logical for you that the Earth did? It's crazy.
ZebrasFirst 1 year ago
@ZebrasFirst Weren't you paying attention? I asked you to demonstrate how you logically deduced "jesus multiplied loaves" from "houses don't create themselves".
For someone who claims to be a "reasoning, thinking person", you sure like to dodge.
If you think house formation and planet formation are comparable processes, your problems are worse than previously thought.
punnet2 1 year ago
punnet2, U wrote,"If you think house formation and planet formation are comparable processes, your problems are worse than previously thought."
- A house and the Earth may not be CREATED in the same manner but they both require a list of necessary laws. Only a willingly blind fool would pretend to believe things naturally falling together- especially when the Earth is a trillion times more complex than a house.
ZebrasFirst 1 year ago
@ZebrasFirst You repeatedly -- and dishonestly -- accuse me of not knowing the difference between a man and a whale, yet you seem not to understand the difference between a planet and a house. This might be related to your inability to define "kind", despite your repeated use of it. If you had spent even a moment researching how stars and planets are formed, you would quickly realize there is nothing for a creator to do.
And isn't god more complex than earth? So who created him?
punnet2 1 year ago
punnet2, U wrote,"isn't god more complex than the earth? So who created him?"
- This will blow your mind, but God wasn't created.
ZebrasFirst 1 year ago
@ZebrasFirst So you're incapable of conceiving of a universe without a creator, yet have no qualms whatsoever believing in a god (presmuably more complex than the universe) without a creator. Can't wait to hear how you defend this duplicit thinking.
And try not to forget: You're still going to show us how you logically deduce "jesus multiplied loaves" from "houses don't create themselves", right? Otherwise, please turn in your "reasoning thinking person" badge at your earliest convenience.
punnet2 1 year ago
punnet2, U wrote,"have no qualms whatsoever believing in a god...without a creator."
- That's correct. Cause and Effect are human comprehensions. Our human minds cannot go past that because we are extremely limited to human reasoning and understanding. However, I can understand God doing things; while you see it occurring naturally on its own. We both accuse the other of the massively impossible.
ZebrasFirst 1 year ago
@ZebrasFirst "Cause and Effect are human comprehesions"
So are gods.
Funny how your "limited human mind" can't grasp basic biology, yet you claim you can understand a supernatural sky fairy. How quaint!
Oh, and little two-faced weasel..."confused parrot" is an insult, you fucking hypocrite.
Gooberlicious54 1 year ago
Gooberlicious54, Okay, I've decided not to continue on with you. You clown too much. So go back up your monkey tree, and pick the fleas of ignorance off your hide. I would be better off having an exchange with an actual chimpanzee than some idiot who thinks he's one. (But is in denial.)
ZebrasFirst 1 year ago
@ZebrasFirst "stop using insults over and over"
...
"go back up your monkey tree"
I guess I shouldn't be surprised that the lying dodger is also a hypocrite.
"I've decided not to continue with you"
Continue what? Evading your claim and flinging baseless insults?
So you're finally going to come clean...or flee?
I guess we'll wait and see. ;)
Gooberlicious54 1 year ago
Gooberlicious54, The circus must be on break, the clown ape is at it again.
ZebrasFirst 1 year ago
@ZebrasFirst "stop using insults over and over"
...
"The circus must be on break, the clown ape is at it again."
"the next round of posts"
You mean the next round of evasive, dishonest bullshit.
Grow some balls you gutless little turd.
Gooberlicious54 1 year ago
Gooberlicious54, You wrote,"Grow some (BEEP) you gutless little turd."
- See? This is exactly what I'm talking about. That's all you ever say over and over. Again, I'd rather go to the zoo, and try to communicate with an actual chimpanzee than a jerk who thinks he's one (but is in denial of it).
Whatever. Goodbye Goofy Goober Gorilla.
You sad sack!
ZebrasFirst 1 year ago
@ZebrasFirst "That's all you ever say over and over. Again."
It is my stock response to gutless little weasels who lie and then evade.
You know, people like YOU.
If you're sick of the same response, how about you finally stop waffling and present the evidence for a god you claimed to have?
Unless, of course, that was ANOHER lie and you don't have any. ;)
Gooberlicious54 1 year ago
@ZebrasFirst You apply "cause and effect" to the universe to arrive at your belief in god--claiming the universe is too complex to have occurred through natural means, but then fail to apply "cause and effect" to this god--although it would be even more complex than the universe. In other words, you replace the mystery of the universe's origin with a greater mystery, then refuse to investigate that greater mystery.
You prefer to content yourself with ignorance.
punnet2 1 year ago
punnet2, U wrote,"you replace the mystery of the universe's origins with a greater mystery, then refuse to investigate that greater mystery."
- Wow. You admitting "the mystery of the universe's origin" shows you do not believe in Self-Creation after all. Good job. I'd rather accept your honesty of not knowing than your arrogance of knowing for certain.
U said,"fail to apply 'cause and effect' to this god..."
- That's correct. But I did not fail, Cause and Effect does not apply to God.
ZebrasFirst 1 year ago
@ZebrasFirst I never said I believed in self-creation. I've said before I don't know. (Whether or not I've told you that specifically I can't remember, so I won't bother to ask this time if you were paying attention...which you probably weren't.)
So in order to "prove" god, you apply cause and effect to everything except to the thing you want to prove. This amounts to a logical fallacy. Let's see if you can figure out which one. (If not, I'll tell you in the next round of posts).
punnet2 1 year ago
punnet2, No, because along with everything else, God created the physical Cause and Effect as well. Think about it! The inventor of time, space, matter, cells, and all of existence is beyond human comprehension!!
Look at it like this: Cartoonists create other worlds thru their creativity. Let's take Jon Arbuckle and his cat, Garfield, and his dog, Odie, for example. Even though those characters exist in a ficticious world, they can never know the mind of man. Nor we, God.
ZebrasFirst 1 year ago
@ZebrasFirst "Even though those characters exist in a ficticious world, they can never know the mind of man. Nor we, God."
BEAUTIFULLY SAID!
We cannot know the mind of God because God is a fictional character.
I'm sure you were trying to imply something else...damn that logic! LOL
Gooberlicious54 1 year ago
Gooberlicious54, Surely, you don't think a Monday-hating, lasanga-loving, orange cat named, Garfield, is real do you? Wait! Don't answer that... Not to crush your heart, but....Curious George isn't real, either!!
ZebrasFirst 1 year ago
@ZebrasFirst Fictional characters aren't real?? OH NO!!!
And remember Zebras - in the absence of the evidence you claimed to have for a god, your god is a fictional character too.
You might want to pay attention to whom you are replying so as not to embarrass yourself. ;)
Thanks for playing!
Gooberlicious54 1 year ago
Gooberlicious54, I'm sorry my point went over your simian skull. Can't say I'm surprised.
ZebrasFirst 1 year ago
@ZebrasFirst christianity is the result of people taking the Bronze Age equivalent of a cartoon seriously. Your god is a character in a fictitious world.
punnet2 1 year ago
punnet2, U wrote,"christianity is the result of people taking the Bronze Age equivalent of a cartoon seriously."
- It's better than a New Age science fiction that literally believes "Planet of the Apes" is a scientific documentary rather than a sci fi classic.
ZebrasFirst 1 year ago
@ZebrasFirst Apparently not, considering Moses starred in it.
punnet2 1 year ago
punnet2, Only an ape humanoid creature who thinks he's related to cabbage will think an actor (Heston) is the same person he portrayed in his scientific documentary ("Planet of the Apes".)
ZebrasFirst 1 year ago
@ZebrasFirst Only a christtard would think "the 10 cummandments" is a historical documentary.
punnet2 1 year ago
punnet2, U wrote,"Only a christtard would think 'the ten commandments' is a historical documentary."
- It is!! It came from the Bible. Duh.
The Red Sea was divided by the power of God. This was of many incidents God interacted with man.
ZebrasFirst 1 year ago
@ZebrasFirst Once again: Only a christtard would believe this is historical. QED
punnet2 1 year ago
@ZebrasFirst :It came from the Bible. Duh."
So do talking snakes, a flat earth, curing disease with magic spells, etc.
You realize how stupid you just made yourself look?
Now, about the EVIDENCE for a god you claimed to have...
Keep on waffling, pigeon! LOL
Gooberlicious54 1 year ago
@ZebrasFirst "Cause and Effect does not apply to God."
Then stop trying to use it to prove a god, that's where the logical fallacy takes place.
And you're not as stupid as you act, you ALREADY KNOW THIS.
Now, instead of making claims about the attributes of your god, how about providing the evidence for its existence...the evidence you earlier claimed to have?
Stop waffling.
Gooberlicious54 1 year ago
punnet2, U wrote,"...demonstrate how you logically deduced 'jesus multiplied loaves' from 'houses don't create themselves' ".
- Well, Jesus is the Son of God. You deny both.
A house cannot build itself. You accept that.
Yet, you also accept the Earth self-creating itself into existence.
This is how I go from miracle to the unplausible: reason and logic. The miracles of birth, life, and death are NOT without reason. You seem to think so.
ZebrasFirst 1 year ago
@ZebrasFirst I accept a house cannot build itself. But I still do not see how you logically conclude "jesus multiplied loaves" from that premise, nor even "jesus is the son of god".
"houses don't build themselves" -> "jesus" remains a logical leap until you specify the intermediate deductive steps.
You claim to be a "reasoning, thinking person", yet pathetically avoid demonstrating your "reasoning, thinking" process when I've asked you to now multiple times.
punnet2 1 year ago
@ZebrasFirst "A house cannot build itself"
And no one ever claimed it could, lying two-faced weasel.
A PLANET is not a house - and if you'd like to know how they are formed (with no help from any god), Google "accretion disk".
Of course, we already know that KNOWLEDGE is not something people like you seek.
Now, about the evidence you keep claiming to have, then fleeing when asked to present it...
Where is it?
Gooberlicious54 1 year ago
Gooberlicious54, If you promise to calm down and stop using insults over and over, I will be serious with you. I've given up on you about twice. I already know you think I'm stupid and worthless. You don't have to be saying it over and over like a confused parrot.
Are you willing to be serious or are we gonna remain in the daycare level?
ZebrasFirst 1 year ago
@ZebrasFirst "stop using insults over and over"
Aww, poor little baby - you can dish it out, but whine like a bitch when it's flung back at you.
Grow up.
"I've given up on you about twice"
Given up? You've fled our "debates" EIGHT TIMES now! Every time I ask you to produce the evidence for a god you claimed to have, you either fling more insults or play the evasion game.
"You don't have to be saying it over and over like a confused parrot"
I'm not the one making unsupported claims.
Gooberlicious54 1 year ago
punnet2, U wrote,"I have not closed my mind to the possibility of being wrong. I'm willing to admit I'm wrong and change my beliefs based on new evidence."
- Why new evidence? Ancient clues isn't convincing enough for you? You're smart enough to know the Earth and other planets did not formed and aligned themselves. That alone is an awesome, spectacular, miraculous event.
Furthermore, before getting into the scientific things, common sense doesn't hurt.
ZebrasFirst 1 year ago
@ZebrasFirst Why new evidence? Because new evidence shows us what we were wrong about before. New evidence is how we went from a geocentric model to a heliocentric model, for example. A "reasoning, thinking person" revises his beliefs based on new information when it comes to light.
I've told you that i'm not close-minded and am willing to admit I'm wrong with sufficient evidence. So for the [alot + 1]-th time, what evidence would you (reasoning, thinking) require to admit you're wrong?
punnet2 1 year ago
punnet2, U wrote,"what evidence would you...require to admit you're wrong?"
- I've answerd that already. It's not my fault you don't like my responses. Change all of world history and remove my brain, and then, I will join you in being an atheist/evolutionist. But, that woluld be as impossible as Self-creation, fish evolving to apes, and cabbage cousins.
ZebrasFirst 1 year ago
@ZebrasFirst You've not answered it already. It is your fault I don't like your responses, when you don't actually respond to the question asked.
Changing world history and removing your brain is not an example of evidence. New evidence in astronomy forced us to admit we were wrong about heliocentrism, and adopt geocentrism.
A mammalian fossil in the pre-Cambrian stratum would serve as evidence falsifying evolution.
So what evidence (new information) would falsify your christian beliefs?
punnet2 1 year ago
punnet2, U wrote,"Changing world history and removing your brain is not an example of evidence."
- My whole point in saying that is, in order for me to doubt or dismiss the Bible, I would have to be in denial of mathematics. You can't cheat math. You can't lie math. You can't change math. The Bible is the same way. You're basically asking me what would falsify mathematics. Nothing.
ZebrasFirst 1 year ago
@ZebrasFirst LOL - you compare the bible to mathematics? The bible is just a book; a poorly compiled, poorly copied and poorly translated book, which has only been around for 2,000 years.
Mathetmatics can be applied in an observable, testable manner. In what comparable way can your bible be applied?
Furthermore, mathematical claims are in fact falsifiable. So once again: what would falsify the bible for you? Here's yoru chance to show you're a "reasoning, thinking person".
punnet2 1 year ago
punnet2, U wrote,"LOL- you compare the bible to mathematics?"
- Yes. Surely, you do not think mathematics was man-made? Mathematics existed way before the existence of man. Man only discovered it because he's intelligent.
ZebrasFirst 1 year ago
@ZebrasFirst Mathetmatics isn't man-made, but the bible assuredly is; it's just a book, which didn't exist in any form you're familiar with until the 4th century.
Different civilizations have developed mathematics independently. The same cannot be said for the bible. Rather cultures have all developed their own religious myths, and the biblical one just happens to be the one which infected your brain.
The bible is not in any sense comparable to mathematics.
punnet2 1 year ago
punnet2, - That's not true. There were Christians as far back as the 1st Century.
U wrote,"Different civilizations have developed mathematics independently."
- Doesn't matter who or what or when math was "developed", I'm saying it always existed. Say millions of years ago when dinosaurs roamed the Earth, let's say two Brontosauruses were drinking water. The number 2 doesn't exist because math wasn't developed yet? Nope.
ZebrasFirst 1 year ago
@ZebrasFirst Yes, little one. There were christards back then, but the bible itself was not put together until the 4th century. Weren't you paying attention?
I'm not contesting that math has always existed; that is what distinguishes it from the bible. Different civilizations have developed mathematics; different civilizations have not independently developed the bible.
punnet2 1 year ago
punnet2, When God FIRST began to create the physical world, the Bible came into existence, otherwise, why would there be Christians before the actual books came together?
I'm just saying that the Bible and math are two forms of solid, unbreakable systems. And only a human being believing he's an ape will try to dismantle them.
ZebrasFirst 1 year ago
Christians can be very UGLY when it comes to defending their invisible magic man even to the point of murder, torture, wars etc. Check the history of how Christianity came about. Jesus would have been dissapointed if he was alive today. Jesus had no church, no religion, no money, hardly any posessions. Look at the contrast of Christians today and when Jesus was around.
angellicvoices 1 year ago
Beware all you Christians!! One day you will be an athiest!!
angellicvoices 1 year ago
Dan Barker belongs to the prometheus society which for people with exceptionally high I.Q.s.
TheShel10 1 year ago
I like Bill Maher's testimony better. He used to be a Catholic but something important happened that made him realize his religious beliefs were all B.S. - he graduated 6th grade. lol
gupsphoo 1 year ago
I love Barker :)
SamuriNinja90 1 year ago
Comment removed
raymondmyers 1 year ago
Now the question of "Once saved always saved" is really going to come to bare. Has he now actually blasphemed the Holy Spirit of Yahushua declaring that the works of Yahuah are not? Or while confessing and bowing will he look face to face with his redeemer and know he is forgiven because he meant it as a young man whether he did as an older man or not?
raymondmyers 1 year ago
Dan Barker, you are a very stupid man! The fool says in his heart that there is no God. The idea is to be prepared at all times because Jesus can come at any time!!
lerryperry 1 year ago
I am 27 and I am also a Christian turned Atheist. Dan Barker is a great inspiration for people like me and I am grateful we have him. Dan is totally right to about how every generation thinks the world is going to end at any minute and Jesus is going to come back. That type of mental abuse use to scare me as a child. :-( That type of crap is still being preached, but I am old enough to see it for the pure CRAP it is.
I am proud to be an atheist and I think Dan Barker rocks.
Zeeboe 1 year ago
@Zeeboe Its only mental abuse if you prefer to live in the world. If the idea of a loving and powerful redeemer who wants to rescue you from the curse you're under is mental torture then you seem to prefer the curse.
raymondmyers 1 year ago
Don't waste your time trying to convince an atheist that God exists. Let them find out the Truth on their own. However, I do ask that you still pray for them.
Matthew 7:6
Jude 18
Revelation181 1 year ago
@Revelation181
If it exists, there should be evidence. If there's evidence, it can be used to convince anyone.
It's really that simple.
BohemianBlasphemy 1 year ago
@BohemianBlasphemy
You can't see the forest for the trees, friend!
Jesus said that only the sinful skeptics will seek a sign (which is proof) and none will be given, except for the Resurrection. If you hardened your heart against God, you will never see the wonderful forest before you. Put away your pre-suppositions and read the Word with an open mind & heart and you will see the message. Christians do not have to convince anyone; we just share the message. God bless you, friend.
Revelation181 1 year ago
@Revelation181
¿Christians do not have to convince anyone?
Read first Peter 3:15
BohemianBlasphemy 1 year ago
@BohemianBlasphemy
That is the "Apologetics Creed". Don't make the mistake of thinking a defense or providing an answer for faith is the same as providing proof... there is a big difference there. Remember my last comment: Jesus said that no sign (proof) will be given, except the sign of Jonah. Either you believe or you don't. If you look for further proof, you will be disappointed because only the skeptic continues to search. Belief brings relief. God bless you.
Revelation181 1 year ago
Carlton Pearson had a similar experience when he adopted his gospel of Inclusion.
Bart Ehrman left fundamentalist Christianity after many years of bible study. He became an agnostic after he studied the problem of suffering.
k0smon 1 year ago
sounds more like mid-life crisis to me...
dkrto 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
"I emptied out all of the bathwater and found there was no baby there"
I hope that all of you atheists who look to this man as a shining example of honesty consider this statement by Dan Barker for what it really means... no baby there. His identification with Christianity was never genuine, it was a lie. His confession was false, he never knew Christ, and as a result he was tossed back and forth by every wave and blown about by the wind. He had no foundation in Christ.
boan000 1 year ago
@boan000 - Saying that is like me saying you are not a Christian because you are judging others.
clicb4 1 year ago 9
@clicb4 No, sorry, clicb4. I'm simply pointing out what Dan Barker has confessed to. That's not judging, it's simply allowing him to speak and considering what his words mean.
If you disagree with my interpretation, that's fine. But wouldn't you have to judge me, i.e., the correctness of my words, to come to that conclusion? Nowhere does Scripture tell Christians not to judge (unless you yank some words of Christ out of context); it tells us to judge rightly. See especially 1 John 2:19
boan000 1 year ago
@boan000 - You can quote me verses all day. It's not gonna change the fact that you are judging another person for their beliefs. You only say he never believed because of some stupid verse in the bible which Christians tend to cling to and ignore other verses that they make excuses for when they are equally as ridiculous.
clicb4 1 year ago 5
clicb4, U wrote,"Saying that is like me saying you are not a Christian because you are judging others." to boan000's comment.
- Well, Christ said there would be fakes to come in His name. Secondly, Christ never said,"Do not judge.", that's a common Bible misconception. Christ said not to judge like a hypocrite. After all, there's a book in the Bible entitled, JUDGES.
ZebrasFirst 1 year ago
@boan000 What an example of circular thinking! I go for the no Jesus (no baby) part, but I never stopped believing in his Father. I became convinced that Jesus was a construct of Constantine, and flushed Christianity out of my brain. You can tell me I was never a true Christian, but I won't believe you.
k0smon 1 year ago
Comment removed
boan000 1 year ago
Comment removed
boan000 1 year ago
@boan000 I primarily became convinced of this because of my readings in a book called Oahspe, which says that Constantine created Christianity as we now know it. Also a book called "Antiquity Unveiled" backed up this philosophy. Not an easy thing to change your way of thinking that you grew up with. You are right in one respect, if I had 'truly known him'..., but how could I if he was just a mythical figure? One point for you.
k0smon 1 year ago
@boan000
WRONG!
I was a Xian for 50 years. You cannot say I was never really Xian on the premise that "we would have never left if I really knew him."
It isn't "him" that any of us knew, but the concept of him, the image of a god man we have only read about.
All of that "slain in the spirit" stuff we all experienced....it's a product of the mind, the brain chemstry, and we cause it within ourselves!
I know U say these things to give yourself comfort, but if U get honest, you'll understand.
Cootabux 1 year ago
@Cootabux "You cannot say I was never really Xian on the premise that "we would have never left if I really knew him."
I didn't say it, the Apostle John did under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Your quarrel isn't with me, but with the authority of Scripture. Regarding the injustice of hell, if you truly understand how abominable our sin is, and the infinite offense it is to an perfectly holy God, you would not see it as unjust. Forgiveness is offered in Christ to all who repent & believe
boan000 1 year ago
boan000
I don't care who said it, and I have no quarrel with anyone. I simply pose questions and comments based on my experience and what I've learned of scripture.
If I truly understood how abominable our sin is???? I can't wait to hear this! Please feel free to explain how terrible we are! But it wouldn't make any difference bcuz no matter how "bad" someone is, nothing warrants hell! Hell isn't punishment. It's sadistic cruelty, only for the sake of causing suffering! It's evil in itself!
Cootabux 1 year ago
boan000
And you should keep this in mind. My conversion (being Born Again), came from an emotional decision, based on a "need to believe." My deconversion was a rational & thoughtful one, coming from 3 yrs of study into scripture. The biblical god was evil!, it's just that simple. I oppose all evil, regardless of how its dressed.
Anything or anyone who kills innocent women & children, advocates slavery & treats women as property, is no god to me. He's only a Tyrant who rules by fear.
Cootabux 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Cootabux "keep this in mind. My conversion (being Born Again), came from an emotional decision"
Sadly, you seem to be a victim of the modern gospel. The new birth is an act of God, not by man's will (Jn 1:13) . The New Birth (Jn 3, 1 Pet 1:23), did you have any say in your birth? The 1st resurrection (Rev 20:5-6), do you have anything to do with your resurrection? made alive in Christ (1 Cor 15:22), can you make yourself alive?
Dead men are dead, repentance & faith are given by God.
boan000 1 year ago
Comment removed
boan000 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@k0smon "I go for the no Jesus (no baby) part "
You convinced yourself that Jesus Christ did not even exist, and somehow you are convinced that you were a true Christian? Jesus said that eternal life (the possession of which defines Christianity) is this: that they know God and Jesus Christ whom God has sent. If you had ever known him there is no way that you could become convinced he did not exist. in fact, if you had truly known him, there is no way you could turn your back on him.
boan000 1 year ago
@boan000
Anytime someone sees thru this religion, you people go into this, "he never was a true Christian" routine!!
And speaking of honesty, and I most certainly can, it takes becoming honest with ones self to take that 1st step into asking the hard questions, then going after the answer.
I was a Christian for over 50 years before I deconverted, which was several years ago. That transition took many years though. It started with me studying scripture deeply for the 1st time. I can't live a lie
Cootabux 1 year ago
@boan000 if his testimony was not good, then no ones is, i could say the same thing with muslims or jews that they were not really muslim or jew because they stopped beleiving. logic, get with it
blazereef 1 year ago
@boan000 if his beleif was false, how can you say anyones elses is true? or is it that anyone who disagrees with your PATHETIC fucking fairytale is lying or doesn't know what they are talking about
blazereef 1 year ago
@blazereef "if his beleif was false, how can you say anyones elses is true?"
It's simple:
They went out from us, but they did not really belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us; but their going showed that none of them belonged to us.
(1Jn 2:19)
boan000 1 year ago
@boan000 I hate to break it to you, but quoting a bible verse proves absolutely nothing when you haven't proven the book itself is reliable or demonstrated that a god exists. It's just words, phrases, and numbers.
clicb4 1 year ago
@clicb4 " you, but quoting a bible verse proves absolutely nothing when you haven't proven the book itself is reliable"
Hi clicb4, the Bible is God's Word. Its prophetic perfection is absolute proof of that. Only an omniscient God can declare the end from the beginning, and bring about the fulfillment of the prophesies he has spoken through his prophets and through his Son.
boan000 1 year ago
@boan000 that is such a stupid comment. The bible is full of errors and contradictions and lots of fairy tales. This is typically of early human beliefs of the earths creation. Those early humans did not have the science and information that we have today. Ironically religions greatest achilles heel is information and knowledge.
angellicvoices 1 year ago
@angellicvoices you wrote, "that is such a stupid comment. The bible is full of errors and contradictions and lots of fairy tales"
If your authority is the skeptic's web sites, and you do not do any independent research, I can understand why you'd think that. However, every purported contradiction is due to a lack of contextual understanding, poor hermeneutics, translational issues, or logical fallacies on the part of the skeptics.
boan000 1 year ago
@boan000 Why do you Christians quote from a questionable and flawed source continuosly? Certainly brainwashed because you cant quote from any other books other than one thats claimed by archaic humans as the only Godly source. If there was such a powerful and perfect God, why on earth would it decide that a small group of desert people decide what to write? How do we know that these men had God talking in their ears when they were writing? Its all rubbish.
angellicvoices 1 year ago
@angellicvoices "Why do you Christians quote from a questionable and flawed source continuosly?"
The Bible's not flawed. Again, its prophetic perfection is absolute proof that it is inspired by an omniscient and omnipotent God who has declared the end from the beginning.
As long as you are looking for reasons not to believe, the enemy of your soul will be sure to provide them for you. However, the Bible, God's Word, has withstood thousands of years of scrutiny and attacks from skeptics.
boan000 1 year ago
It's encouraging to see people employ critical thinking and come to their senses, especially when they are brainwashed at such an early age.
comingatchu 1 year ago
Jesus Christ addressed apostasy:
Luke 8: "And the ones on the rock are those who, when they hear the word, receive it with joy. But these have no root; they believe for a while, and in time of testing fall away".
I would like to correct his statement that every Christian thinks the world is going to come any minute. The Bible tells us to watch but no one in heaven or earth knows the day or hour, even the angels.
HeatherOfOz 1 year ago
@HeatherOfOz - Yeah, I'd fall away in a time of testing if someone told me to sacrifice my child too...like god did in the bible. He wasn't saying that Christians know when the world is going to end...just that they are always aware that it COULD end at any moment. I did a video about the end times recently and how I thought it was all ridiculous.
clicb4 1 year ago
@clicb4 are you referring to God telling Abraham to sacrifice Isaac? Abraham was faithful and his son Isaac lived.
HeatherOfOz 1 year ago
@HeatherOfOz - My point was that a god that would command such a thing to test someone is mentally unstable. I know human beings that would never ask for any kind of loyalty test, especially not one that involved sacrifice.
clicb4 1 year ago
@clicb4 I can see you don't want to believe. That's it then. Bye for now.
HeatherOfOz 1 year ago
@HeatherOfOz - Typical Christian way of acting. I point out something logical and then you hurl accusations at me and run.
clicb4 1 year ago
@clicb4 what a childish remark for you to make. I did not hurl accusations for a start and I did not run. I simply stated the obvious and left it at that. What do you want me to do? Keep checking in to argue the point with you? Do you think I have anything else to say to someone obviously not interested? I have other interests besides arguing with people.
HeatherOfOz 1 year ago
@HeatherOfOz - Obviously you can't take me replying to your comment with logic. I logically reply, you accuse me of just not wanting to see your point of view...completely ignoring what I said, and then say "end of discussion" basically. How am I childish for that? You wanna say something, but not keep replying to it? I don't get it. I just responded to the way you acted and what I'm used to seeing. I replied to your comment on my channel, but would rather you comment on the video itself.
clicb4 1 year ago