The relativist with the glasses is confused - arguing about "antiquated views of god" as being absurd yet he talks about Karma and his concept of the entire world as an illusion as if that is somehow more novel and correct. The flaw in his logic was exposed and he had a hissy fit like a little child and ran away.
Hehe, I'm loving the part when they both start yelling, and the moron is yelling to other moron that he is yelling over him. This debate was utterly stupid.
@bammc19 That is not a contradictory statement. Saying that there is no absolute truth can be shown to be true using modal logics, but any modal system cannot be shown to be completely consistent, so no statements can be completely certain, but that can clearly show that if no statement can be completely certain then there cannot be an absolute truth. The only way you can have absolute truth is if you create an infinite system, which is impossible.
"There would be no right or wrong and at death we'd all be the same", uhm yeah, I thought you were trying to prove us wrong about that? The 'point' that you spent all that time obnoxiously working up to was to dismiss the thing you are trying to disprove on face value? Good stuff! He's at a university, they should of had the debating team use him a an intellectual punching bag.
Law conscience is futile you may actually succeed in getting someone to be moral even by law. What Christ does is create new creations by Spirit life. Spirit life is not ruled by law. Spirit is not law or morality it is perpetual Virtue.I'm grateful for wittnessing but it is futile to argue morality.Flesh is powerless to grasp virtue of Spirit and cannot be led there by reason of law. We need Spirit in our preaching and Christ is enough. I do not need to prove moral law to reach God, futile.
Just because you would like rape, pedophilia, murder, cannibalism, genocide, etc. to be absolutely wrong, doesn't mean they are. Just because you would like to believe that a god exists, doesn't mean it does. This speaker needs to slow down and think about these issues more deeply. I try to do this regularly. It's kindof like running CCleaner in my brain.
@CamillaCalamity They are wrong. They rob a Human of dignity, demean, cause harm and damage. To say they are not wrong, is to pose a society without order. Definitely without love and respect.
@Brucev7 I agree with you. I don't agree with the speaker that right and wrong are physical realities like 1+1=2. Morality is absolutely man-made and is relative. Just like philosophy, religon, laws and ethics. I think the challenger made great arguments.
@CamillaCalamity Humans are "relative" in their thinking and decisions when it comes to emotions, morals, ethics, etc. God has instilled absolutes on a person's heart. Murder is wrong. So is Robbery, Rape. If we just allowed anyone to determine, or the majority, what is right and wrong, it would be a great mess, chaos.
@Brucev7 I really don't think you should try to bring God into this discussion, especially Abraham's God. I went to Christian school so I know my Old Testament. God blessed his people after they raped, killed and stole land out from under other cultures. Life was mean in Biblical times and the God of Abraham is mean. I don't want to live by that code of ethics, I think I can do better.
@CamillaCalamity I am a student of the Bible. The OT & NT. You can't cherry pick a verse or passage out of context and understand the meaning. Do you feel the same way about what your Government does to others in war? God is Holy, sovereign, just, perfect. His plan is best. Gen 50:20, Rom 8:28
@Brucev7 You can't just cherry pick the nice bits either and make excuses for the nasty parts. I know what the context of the Old Testament is: the God of Abraham has a chosen people, he allows his people to kill and enslave others culters and people who are "disobedient", every now and then he decides to kill whole cities and once killed almost everyone on earth, he demands blood sacrifice. All that stuff is against my personal moral code.
@CamillaCalamity Not the issue. Unless you have the teaching and guidance of the HS, which you have to be a true Follower of Christ, indwelt, you can not understand the Bible says. All is for His purpose. People do similar things throughout History, but their reasons and motives were selfish. That is the difference. God is a loving God. The Lover of your, mine and all's souls.
@Brucev7 Oh spare me that elitist crap! I am capable of understanding the Bible and so is any scholar. There are people, who are not necessarily Christians, who are Bible experts. They know the language, the translations, and most importantly the historical context. Few Christians have ever studied the Bible objectively. How can they? They have a horse in that race.
@CamillaCalamity But you haven't shown you do. Not about who is more knowledgeable. Y'all always try to spin it that way though. The reference is God's Holy word. And that maybe so, but without the regeneration and will to follow God and by His principles what good is all of their knowledge?
idk much about the theory of relativity, but when that guy was corrected about substituting light for mass, he got upset and wanted to change the subject. o_O 2:00
The other guy saw his cosmovision being totally destroyed, got upset and left, lol... instead of being humble and understand. That's pride (sin) for you.
2 Corinthians {10:4} (For the weapons of our warfare [are] not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds;) {10:5} Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ;
Chad, you did a great job of interacting with this person. I have experienced this myself and it is quite frustrating, but you kept a cool head. I have found, on both sides of the argument (myself included), that it is very difficult to keep emotions out of a logical argument. When that happens people tend to lash out, just like this person did.
"There are no absolute truths." Funniest thing I've ever heard. The statement is an absolute truth. Keep up the good work, Chad.
So what exactly is his argument: That because we want morality to be objective so badly and faith in God is the only way we can conclude that we should therefore believe in God ?
Isn't that a clear case of the fallacy called "appeal to consequence" ?
@MoralityIsAReligion I believe you are correct there. His entire argument up until the end was fairly strong, until he started making his final assertions. This is where the fallacy was used, etc. Just because you can not see how *Insert inconceivable thing* can be lived with, doesn't make it false.
@MoralityIsAReligion I don't think he's saying that that's WHY we should believe in GOD, just that life would be pretty dumb without GOD. There are other ways to show GOD's existence, one having to do with the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics I believe.
Also, I think he's trying to appeal to general human sense of right and wrong to show that there must be a Lawgiver ("It seems like rape is wrong, so what makes it so?")
Yeah but what's the point of saying X is dumb if you do not have the intention to change something about X being dumb ? He clearly has the intention to convince people of faith in God because not having faith in God makes life dumb. But that's not an argument. All type of things are dumb. Cancer is dumb, my job is dumb, my bank account balance is dumb. So should I start believing I am rich and immune to cancer ? That's no reasoning at all. It's wishful thinking.
Life ONLY has meaning if it's finite, if we only get one life. If life is infinite, then it becomes empty and insignificant. This life is not some test, it's not some means to an end, life is an end in itself. Life has meaning because we only get one, it's precious...
Thats the first time I heard someone say," I don't believe that 1+1=2. I bet he does a little bit of acid and shrooms in his dorm, that's why he's living in a dream where there are no absolutes. It's all an illuuuuuusiooooon.
How should I scientifically prove (science measures and tests everything within matter space and time)someone exists who is outside of time and space and is a Spirit ( non-material)?
Here is something for you. Can you scientifically prove that the Pilgrims actually landed on Plymouth rock? If not then according to your standard, its not true and you must campaign to have it removed from the history books, because it is a lie, a deception.
I dont see science as a proof that there is no God, I see scientific findings as proof of God. Just my opinion. Best wishes to you all, no matter what you choose to believe.
@diakoniaable In my point of view real science is only the discovery of the works of the Creator. Now pseudo science is what we see the most, using real science with human delusion and pride, not accounting all the facts, a human story where God cannot exists to justify all human acts.
It can be provably determined, If I put up two fingers, it would always be the same amount, it doesn't matter that I call it, objectively I am holding up the same number of fingers no matter how you look at it.
@BenjaminWirtz *facepalm* yes because math and morality are obviously interchangeable. Did your brain take a vacation while you were writing that? The funniest part is that even such a ridiculous comparison could actually be used to argue relativism.
Math proves there are absolutes true it doesn't prove moral absolutism but it opens up the possibility. Rape is wrong everywhere even if a society says it is OK.
@BenjaminWirtz Even if there was the slightest connection between mathematics and human judgement, its still nonsense. Math is still just a language we apply to the world around us and its the most reliable, but to think there's anything inherently 'absolute' about it is naieve at best. At some point mathematicians might have thought they had the absolute answer to the surface of a triangle, until non-Euclidian geometry came along. "Rape is wrong" is something you feel, nothing more.
@BenjaminWirtz A good math prof would answer that a mathematical proof is only valid within the system of axioms set up in order to prove it. Gödel proved that it is impossible to prove that a system is consistent using the axioms of the system itself, thus any mathematical proof is uncertain.
@stregan7 just because with out a god there may not be objective moral values doesn't mean that god or morality exist! Stop falling victim to the fallacy of wishful thinking.
@badpanda84 Have you actually investigated any of them? Have you looked to find out if what they teach is right?If you are genuinely concerned about your eternal future how do you start to find out which is right? The truth is they profoundly contradict each other and will be horrified if you lumped them all into the same band of "all religions and paths lead to a god or God" Jesus said "If you seek Me with all your heart, you will find Me"
@ruleofthespirit The truth is they profoundly contradict each other "
Agreed that is my point -- how is say a Christians claiming to have the truth any different from a Muslim have the truth..
They all claim to have the absolute truth -- clearly only one is correct - therefore there must be a lot of people who are lying when they claim to have the absolute truth.
" Jesus said "If you seek Me with all your heart, you will find Me"
@badpanda84 You haven't answered the question. Have you actually investigated any of them? Have you looked to find out if what they teach is right? Or do you trot this "there are so many, I dont know which is right, so I wont bother with any and if a Christian challenges my lifestyle I will point him to this argument so I don't have to give an answer"
So , which have you bothered to look into and if so, what did you look for in them?
@badpanda84 Mate I agree - I'm just pointing out that a) this shit was completely acceptable more recently than we imagine; if you want something that was only acceptable 2,000 years ago, have a look at the Ancient Greek model of the family and b) though we tell ourselves we're free of this, we've moved on, in reality slavery may continue to exist where we think it's eradicated. Just how free are 'illegals' in the States to quit their often atrociously-paid jobs in terrible conditions?
Also if I were u I would make a response video to my refutation videos because the longer u delay the more it makes me and others think that your not sincere! And I wouldn't like to think that about u.
Yes I Agee the relativistic guy was acting a fool ! But Chad just because you say there can't be meaning to life or an objective standard of morality with out your God doesnt make meaning, morality,or your god pop into existence! Thats a logical fallacy of wishful thinking.
@philfish120@JayMerc75 If God were responsible for people's morals and ensuring they knew what was right, how did humans not know that slavery, that constant millstone on the States, was wrong? The great Mr Carlin, as always, expresses it better than I can: ?v=kQ7XFvniWWE
Human nature. Ever since sin entered into the world, men have been selfish. If left to themselves they will do whats best for them no matter what it does to somebody else.
I think that many of the slave owners in the early days of the United States knew that slavery was wrong, they just chose to ignore it because it worked for them.
@philfish120 If god created the world & humans in his image, and sin entered, then the fault is with the creator. It can be no other way.
How precisely do you think humans rose to prominence if not by cooperating and suppressing selfishness?
The historical evidence suggests most slaveowners saw little wrong with it - the argument was that every society needed a mud-sill class, so better the 'inferior' blacks than wage-slaved Northern whites (see Watson, Conflict and Collaboration, 1985, p275)
He created them in his own image, but he also gave them a choice: to obey or disobey. Adam disobeyed, so every human is now born a hedonist.
The thing is, every person is born with God's law inside them. They know what is right and wrong. We also have the power of reason. Anyone can see that you won't get anywhere by just stealing and killing. So they cooperate because they need to.
Some of the things I've read say differently, but that's besides the point.
@philfish120 The problem remains: if Adam (doesn't evolution interfere with this story?) chose disobedience, and the way he made decisions, his reason, and his 'will' were set up by god, god is still at fault. What kind of vindictive man sets up a test - the fruit of knowledge - that he knows his subjects will fail?
Again, the question is: if we know right from wrong b/c of god, why was slavery introduced in the first place? Why do some people think gays are evil, and others they're fine?
First of all, I don't believe in evolution, but please don't try to start a debate on that because I'm sure that will go nowhere.
Do you think it would have been better if he didn't give him the choice? God loved us, and he wanted us to want to love him back. That means giving us a choice. Some decide to love him, some decide to hate him.
Because since Adam, man has decided what is right in his own eyes. They have altogether turned away from God's law, and do what they want.
@philfish120 Yeah, I imagine it would go nowhere. Cardinal Bellarmine's words will suffice: 'To assert that the earth revolves around the sun is as erroneous as to claim that Jesus was not born of a virgin.'
The problem with this choice idea is that the idea we have a free spirit, independent of our brains and reason, that can make these choices looks increasingly unlikely. Even if we did have spirits, god must've created them - in his own image. Still, the problem remains - why make us flawed?
the spirit of pride is damning. it's like ppl are rejecting objective reality & deliberately espousing the creed of irrationality, and for what? because we hate accountability? are we evolving or devolving? a psychopath can not see past his own subjective light & that's what we have: a world full of psychopaths.
@sKewbrain The ramblings of a mad man! You sound like your giving a talk to a room full of drugged up hippies right before you all commit suicide. I admit, the first time I read that I didn't think much of it. But, the second time its like "what a load of utter incoherent bullshit..." Amazing!! Well done!!
@TruthThink1 lolz thanks for proving my point. isn't anybody real these days? I hate excuses & self-deceiving fantasy & I rly never gave a damn about popular opinion. It is what it is so pride/denial is lame & weak in my eyes. all bs aside, you know Im right about the last comment. look how peaceful the guy was at first until he was hit with conviction, then he turned all hateful. like a junky in denial.
I'd rather hear straight forward absolutes than to live under a convenient deception.
@sKewbrain This Chad guy thinks he is come kind of profound philosopher on a mission to free people from the chains of their own subjective worldview. The guy is just a sophist, and a bad one at that. He keeps trying to pull metaphysical trumpcards to shore up his notions of how HE perceives the world, when actually his logic doesn't stand up to the smallest of scrutiny. The guy was annoyed by the endless string of outrageous and fallacious claims - nothing to do with denial.
@TruthThink1 "how HE perceives the world" he's not spewing opinion or relative "needs" he's giving the biblical worldview which is far outside of human opinion. humans being liars by nature will discern temporal convenience from inconvenience & that's the basic thinking of the carnal man: survival of the fittest. that's called "lust." the spiritual man's discernment is between truth & error no matter how it effects his pleasures & emotions. he knows *ultimate* truth to be absolute.
@TruthThink1 Meanwhile some rapist, paedophile-druggie is allowed to do whatever the hell they want. But that is the way the world is, unfortunately. People don't like accountability and that is going to be a HUGE problem which society needs to surmount (somehow) if we are going to progress into the 22nd century. And on all levels, political, social and personal. But that said, I don't think rejecting objective reality is the problem. Social and moral decay is far more complex.
@TruthThink1 "his logic doesn't stand up to the smallest of scrutiny" exactly. which is why he denies his own understanding & takes the premise of a Holy first cause. you can't ration our understandings of reality without it. the guy wasnt annoyed because Chad didn't make sense. he got angry because he felt shame & didn't want to deal with the conviction. btw even if u dont believe in biblical Prophecy, understand that the leaders of this system do & they're determined to fulfil it by all means
@sKewbrain Something else.. I'm sorry if I came across a bit strong in my previous message. To be honest, you seem to be a pretty smart and sincere guy and there aren't enough of people like that around imo. And I can kind of see your point, people are blinded by their emotion and lack of understanding of the world. I hate people that lead a selfish and immoral life - its such a waste! So many good people that are dying in the world would give anything to have a second chance.
@sKewbrain People know the difference between right and wrong, and if they don't know, they aught to know. That doesn't mean that a "moral law giver" is responsible for deciding what is right and what is wrong. We know, as a human being we know that rape is wrong, the genesis of while I would suggest is biological - in that we do not like PAIN. Equally therefore, inflicting pain on others, whether physical or emotional is wrong.
@TruthThink1 "That doesn't mean that a "moral law giver" is responsible" why not? if there's law, there is a lawgiver. it's foundational to the very basics of cause-effect reasoning that separates man from beast. lol that sounds kinda cliche, but true 4 the most part. we don't have to "learn" shame, guilt, conviction etc... we have a moral conscience that other animals don't have. without a first cause that's moral itself, that's probably not possible.
@TruthThink1 Your argument is false if there is no God than the law is given by man. So if a judge or government says it is the law that you can commit murder than murder is no longer wrong. And you state that we know what is wrong but I can give you an example of why that makes no sense. Gladiator games where held in the roman empire where millions committed murder no one look at it as wrong it was sport. Rome conquered land raping and enslaving people no one in Rome look at it as wrong.
@sKewbrain We have the right to freedom and to do what we want, so long as we don't jeopardise the rights of OTHERS in the process. I.e the right to happiness, quiet enjoyment, property etc.
I enjoy listening to music, I receive great happiness from it. I have a RIGHT to that happiness, however there are obvious restrictive covenants to that right. I might enjoy my music really loud, but that happiness is to the detriment of someone else - which is wrong. That applies to every vice.
@TruthThink1 to the standard of God(whole goodness), we have no rights. We made nothing, ordained nothing & change nothing. but that's on the ultimate scale. relatively, as you're saying, our rights are determined by man. in that case, you're right. but without an ultimate lawgiver that's sovereign to the entropic reality, there's no standard outside of man's law & therefore no reason why a selfish person should submit to man's laws. with that "If you dont get caught, it's not a crime."
Chad: I absolutely love watching your debates/presentations. What a great job you do. I would like to make a request. I watch your videos in my home and my children stand over my shoulder a lot of the time. This is the first video I've come across that foul language has not been bleeped out and it shocked me! Is it possible to censor out foul language so that I don't have to worry about my kids' ears? That'd be great! Keep up the good fight, Chad!!
Chad: I absolutely love watching your debates/presentations. What a great job you do. I would like to make a request. I watch your videos in my home and my children stand over my shoulder a lot of the time. This is the first video I've come across that foul language has not been bleeped out and it shocked me! Is it possible to censor out foul language so that I don't have to worry about my kids' ears? That'd be great! Keep up the good fight, Chad!!
Chad: I absolutely love watching your debates/presentations. What a great job you do. I would like to make a request. I watch your videos in my home and my children stand over my shoulder a lot of the time. This is the first video I've come across that foul language has not been bleeped out and it shocked me! Is it possible to censor out foul language so that I don't have to worry about my kids' ears? That'd be great! Keep up the good fight, Chad!!
He absolutely claimed that truth is not absolute and now he's claiming all things are an illusion and the claims that's true also?This atheist keeps over turning himself.
If that is the case then I refuse to engage in conversation with you. I sincerely hope that you find your way in this world and realise that you don't need religion to be be a good man. We are so lucky to be alive, in a time full of overwhelming possibility. Don't waste the time you have searching for something that doesn't exist when the evidence is right in front of you. Good luck, see you when you get there.
I would probably make a joke about it - "In my defence, God, you cant seriously expect someone to believe in you based purely on ancient folklore which has been badly translated."
"Also one final thing, God, or shall I call you Jahweh? Do you not think that the Bible is due for a 2nd edition any time soon? I'm thinking maybe an eBook, probably better fot the environment, than paper? OR maybe an Audiobook (for the people you decided should be blind)?"
@TheObservationDeck Had the Bible have been a little more pellucid in its content: perhaps the Judeo-Christian regimes would not have taken the lives of an uncountable number of people. Perhaps the Pope wouldn't have rounded up the Knight Templar and executed them. Maybe hundreds of thousands of people wouldn't have died during the Crusades. Maybe the Thirty Years War wouldn't have happened. Maybe the endless bloodshed during the Dark Ages and the Inquisition wouldn't have happened.
@TheObservationDeck You are, frankly, delusional if you think that the Bible is a genuine and accurate account of historic events. And what remains even more bizarre is that you discard elegant explanations (evolution) and instead embrace the idea that instead, you came from a dirt man and rib woman. I want you to answer this and I want a straight answer:
Do you really think that "God" made a man out of some dirt and a woman out of a rib - those people inbred and that is where people come from?
I know which person I would rather be. And in the highly unlikely event I stand in front of a white gate when I die, I would like to think that people get recognised for who they are and what they DO - not what they believe in. I would also hope that I would be forgiven for thinking that God doesn't exist, seeing that there isn't a single shred of evidence to convince me otherwise.
@SubconsciousGatherer It seems strange that people that do not believe in God are sent to hell. Meanwhile those that have killed and tortured in the name of God are rewarded. They go to heaven: a perfect place with angels! And trumpets! Meanwhile, the significant few that dedicated their lives trying change the world and make it a better place and did all the good they can - they are eternally punished. And these people burn in hell forever.
And when you look at the bible: it says that god created the heavens and the earth in 7 days and then created man. But we now know that various species existed on this planet long before we did. So why were dinosaurs omitted from the biblical creation story? Because MAN wrote the bible and the existence of dinosaurs was not common knowledge when it was written. And yet the bible is seen as an acceptable authority for some reason. We have a word for "unicorn", but that doesn't mean one existed.
I have a better question. Why are you assuming that dinosaurs are omitted from the biblical creation story? I'll take a guess as to why you assume this... because the word "dinosaur" isn't in Genesis right? Nevermind that the word "dinosaur" wasn't even used until the 1800s but hey, TruthThink1 wants 21st-century language to appear in ancient texts in order for him to understand it.
@TheObservationDeck Well one thing's for sure. Donkeys and snakes can talk. We know this, thanks to the Bible. Still, I don't know anyone who's ever witnessed such an event, but don't think about it too hard. You might start thinking it's a load of bull.
The Bible does not claim donkeys and snakes talk on their own. These are supernatural events of which you presuppose cannot happen along with the existence of God, and other spiritual beings.
“I don't know anyone who's ever witnessed such an event”
So your logic is if you haven't witnessed it, it hasn't happened right?
@TheObservationDeck I do not believe in supernatural events for the simple fact that no one (and I mean NO ONE) has any evidence that the supernatural exists. You can't just claim it does, then start from there that anything's possible (the theist mind frame essentially).
Re: Part 2, No. You are the one misrepresenting ME. I've never known anyone to witness a talking donkey or snake, so the correct stance is to maintain it's not happened until evidence concludes otherwise.
Bearing in mind religion is something borne from the ancient world. To me it seems inconceivable that people still allow themselves to get hung up this way in the 21st century. People actually think that Jonah was swallowed up by a GIANT FISH for THREE DAYS. Philosopher David Hume quite rightly points out that such miracles are used to convince people that an imperceptible agent exists: when actually any testimony lacks honesty, intelligence and EDUCATION.
When I see atheists argue like this I can't help but wonder if they understand in any way the scientific theories that they hold dear to. They are clearly just as blind as they claim their God believing opponents to be. I mean, do you understand that Stephen Hawking's presuppositions necessitate his conclusions. His thesis is grounded in metaphysical philosophy none of which can be confirmed through observational data? Anything but God right?
The journalist Andrew Mueller is of the opinion that pledging yourself to any particular religion ‘is no more or less weird than choosing to believe that the world is rhombus-shaped, and borne through the cosmos in the pincers of two enormous green lobsters called Esmerelda and Keith.’
Everyone is entitled to their opinion but what you have just quoted from Andrew Mueller is nothing more than that and it carries no weight. I hope that you understand the difference between an opinion and truth.
Finally, light doesn't have a mass. And this goes back to the point I made prior, because Chad, and many people like him misuse "science" and "philosophy" to convince impressionable people that they know what they are talking about, when actually they don't. People are too quick to let someone tell them what they want to hear and not listen to autonomous reason within themselves.
@TheObservationDeck In response to your comments regarding the ethics. I would suggest that it is indeed immoral to use MONEY to lure people into a debate on a street corner. Especially, when Chad knows that it is impossible to pass the "good person test". That looks like deception to me. And thats why 7:15 is bleeped out.
So if Chad did not give money away, would his debating techniques then become moral in your eyes? Do you realize he gives people five dollars for failing the test? And how are you in a position to determine what is moral?
"Science" by definition is a free market of open thought which encourages people to think for themselves; the "body" of science ironically will always continue to evolve as technology and the human capacity increases over time.
I would not be surprised if "Science" does eventually uncover metaphysical phenomena which our existing technology cannot detect. However, we must still remain rational and explore possible explanations for something rather than look for an easy way out.
Additionally, I would recommend that we steer clear of similar arguments like whether or not the universe is infinite. Science would suggest that the universe is NOT infinite. Yet immediately a nonsensical counter claim comes about like:
The universe must be infinite! Because there must be something at the very edge of the universe, there cant just be a wall? So whats on the other side of the wall?
We all seem like intelligent and well-read people, so lets keep this high brow please =)
@TheObservationDeck If the atheist were to suggest that the universe did have a beginning then the immediate counterargument would be: how can something appear out of nothing? And the theist would instantly proclaim that something must have caused the universe to come into existence. And the atheist then explains: then who created the creator? And so the adolescent argument goes on and on ad infinitum.
If you're going to contend to keep these arguments intelligent and "highbrow" I would suggest you stop calling people's arguments "adolescent and nonsensical." If you have nothing to add to the argument other than your personal suggestion to steer clear of it I would kindly suggest you take your advice and steer clear.
@rationalresponder If you believe in god then fine, but it remains immoral to spin out scientific and philosophical propaganda to try and brainwash people that are obviously impressionable.
And religion has always been that way. It keeps the mob under control and can be used to convince people to go into battle where they are sure to die. Look at the Dark Ages, the Crusades and the Inquisition. All of which were condoned by the POPE. A church I am sure you are all proud to be a part of!
1+1 is 2 that is true. But what more than mathematics handles with absolute truths? Math is the only thing that does that, its the purest method in science there is. How ever, math is not part of the physical realm its just a system that we created. Its a concept and not a real thing. So in physical reality there still is no absoutes.
That whole spiel was pointless. You still didn't demonstrate that there was an objective right and wrong, you just gave an "argument" from emotion ("Wow, so Hitler wasn't objectively wrong") You still haven't demonstrated that morality is objective.
Wow, the guy on the left really deserves a lot of those laughs. I don't support the specific position of either of the debaters, but the guy on the right totally did better than the guy on the left.
I hate how the street preacher keeps bringing up rapists and baby killers as a way to say "those are the bad guys" when those are the very people his religion says CAN get into heaven. His god will forgive ANYTHING you do as long as you repent and trust on Jesus. All these "wrongs" he's talking about will NOT keep you out of heaven. His god welcomes all kinds. Disgusting.
@TheObservationDeck Not at all. What's disgusting is the idea that you can do whatever you want, then ask Jesus to forgive you and then get into heaven. it's all BS, but I'm put off by the fact that some people believe it.
So if you committed a crime (be it credit card fraud) and you were sentenced to three years in jail with bail of $40,000 would you be put off if someone came to bail you out if you knew in your heart that you would never want to do it again? And, your statement above about what Christianity is and how to get into heaven is a misrepresentation of biblical principles. And, how have you come to know that it is, "all BS." And, why does it matter if some people believe it?
@TheObservationDeck If I commit a crime, I should be obligated to pay the consequences. If I can't, then that's my fault. If someone wants to pay my fine, that is their choice, but how absurd they should think I owe them something in return. That's not help, that's close to blackmail. How did I misrepresent the Bible? Is it not true you can be a wretched person all your life, ask Jesus to forgive you, then go to heaven? I don't like people believing in things they can't prove.
@TheObservationDeck I'm an atheist, so quoting from the Bible makes as much sense to me as if you'd read me a fortune cookie. Just because it's written in a book does not make it true. Even so, you can interpret the Bible to say whatever you like (and Christians certainly do, you'll have to agree). No, I probably can't prove EVERYTHING I believe in, but the stuff I can't prove is of no consequence, and I certainly don't tell others they have to accept that belief (like Christians do).
I'm not asking you to believe in Christianity. I am showing you that you are misrepresenting it in your argumentation. I also hope that you would hold yourself to the same standards that you judge another worldview with. To be an atheist, you have to believe some pretty unbelievable and very unprovable things and I think the things that you cannot prove are of great consequence.
@TheObservationDeck The atheist position simply rejects the claim of there being a god. It does not answer or explain or claim knowledge of anything. It just abstains from the claim of there being a god to explain things. If you can prove your god, then the atheist can be convinced and will change beliefs. Can you?
@TheObservationDeck First of all, just to clarify, atheism has no position regarding anything BUT the lack of a belief in gods. Secondly, our best science has found that the current universe did in fact have a beginning, but we have yet to find out what happened prior to the Big Bang. It's possible that before that moment there was a previous universe, and before that, another. Existence, therefore, may in fact be eternal, with no beginning.
So regardless of the fact that you do not believe in God (your atheistic position), which scientific theory do you personally subscribe to? Big Bang, Infinite Universe Regression, Panspermia, intergalactic ballistic missiles, etc.?
@TheObservationDeck Big Bang, plus the idea that the universe(s) i.e. existence, is eternal. No gods required. Gods don't answer anything, they only add more mystery and can't be backed up with any evidence.
The Big Bang requires a beginning. An eternal universe does not require a beginning. You can't have it both ways, it would be contradictory. So does the universe have a beginning or not in your opinion.
@Brucev7 I think C.C. Is still thinking about this question. You have good arguments.
tnmusicman1 2 weeks ago
The relativist with the glasses is confused - arguing about "antiquated views of god" as being absurd yet he talks about Karma and his concept of the entire world as an illusion as if that is somehow more novel and correct. The flaw in his logic was exposed and he had a hissy fit like a little child and ran away.
Unorthodox5000 1 month ago
@Unorthodox5000 Yeah, he was almost espousing classic Hinduism. Maybe he thought it was new age or something.
OneEyedJack1970 1 month ago
If there is no absolute truth, that statements is self-destructive, Why? because it´s not true...no se espongen, but that is an absolute truth
realhomosapiens 1 month ago
Hehe, I'm loving the part when they both start yelling, and the moron is yelling to other moron that he is yelling over him. This debate was utterly stupid.
astroboomboy 1 month ago
"There is no absolute truth" Do you believe that is truth? Contradictory statement.
bammc19 2 months ago
@bammc19 That is not a contradictory statement. Saying that there is no absolute truth can be shown to be true using modal logics, but any modal system cannot be shown to be completely consistent, so no statements can be completely certain, but that can clearly show that if no statement can be completely certain then there cannot be an absolute truth. The only way you can have absolute truth is if you create an infinite system, which is impossible.
astroboomboy 1 month ago
"There would be no right or wrong and at death we'd all be the same", uhm yeah, I thought you were trying to prove us wrong about that? The 'point' that you spent all that time obnoxiously working up to was to dismiss the thing you are trying to disprove on face value? Good stuff! He's at a university, they should of had the debating team use him a an intellectual punching bag.
seblasian 2 months ago
Comment removed
seblasian 2 months ago
Law conscience is futile you may actually succeed in getting someone to be moral even by law. What Christ does is create new creations by Spirit life. Spirit life is not ruled by law. Spirit is not law or morality it is perpetual Virtue.I'm grateful for wittnessing but it is futile to argue morality.Flesh is powerless to grasp virtue of Spirit and cannot be led there by reason of law. We need Spirit in our preaching and Christ is enough. I do not need to prove moral law to reach God, futile.
polopowers1 2 months ago
"There is no absolute!"
That's a pretty absolute statement to make don't you think?
I love learning stuff from you rational responder! What you say makes total sense!
Petriealright 2 months ago
You can always tell when someone is on the back foot in an argument. The guy got more and more frustrated as his arguments were repeatedly shot down.
Then he swore and started snarky comments that are out of place in debate 'I can raise my voice'. Finally, he walks off in a huff.
GoldenbanjoDJ 3 months ago
God bless Chad.
IELTSExamination 3 months ago
Just because you would like rape, pedophilia, murder, cannibalism, genocide, etc. to be absolutely wrong, doesn't mean they are. Just because you would like to believe that a god exists, doesn't mean it does. This speaker needs to slow down and think about these issues more deeply. I try to do this regularly. It's kindof like running CCleaner in my brain.
CamillaCalamity 3 months ago
@CamillaCalamity They are wrong. They rob a Human of dignity, demean, cause harm and damage. To say they are not wrong, is to pose a society without order. Definitely without love and respect.
Brucev7 3 months ago
@Brucev7 I agree with you. I don't agree with the speaker that right and wrong are physical realities like 1+1=2. Morality is absolutely man-made and is relative. Just like philosophy, religon, laws and ethics. I think the challenger made great arguments.
CamillaCalamity 3 months ago
@CamillaCalamity Humans are "relative" in their thinking and decisions when it comes to emotions, morals, ethics, etc. God has instilled absolutes on a person's heart. Murder is wrong. So is Robbery, Rape. If we just allowed anyone to determine, or the majority, what is right and wrong, it would be a great mess, chaos.
Brucev7 3 months ago
@Brucev7 I really don't think you should try to bring God into this discussion, especially Abraham's God. I went to Christian school so I know my Old Testament. God blessed his people after they raped, killed and stole land out from under other cultures. Life was mean in Biblical times and the God of Abraham is mean. I don't want to live by that code of ethics, I think I can do better.
CamillaCalamity 3 months ago
@CamillaCalamity I am a student of the Bible. The OT & NT. You can't cherry pick a verse or passage out of context and understand the meaning. Do you feel the same way about what your Government does to others in war? God is Holy, sovereign, just, perfect. His plan is best. Gen 50:20, Rom 8:28
Brucev7 3 months ago
@Brucev7 You can't just cherry pick the nice bits either and make excuses for the nasty parts. I know what the context of the Old Testament is: the God of Abraham has a chosen people, he allows his people to kill and enslave others culters and people who are "disobedient", every now and then he decides to kill whole cities and once killed almost everyone on earth, he demands blood sacrifice. All that stuff is against my personal moral code.
CamillaCalamity 3 months ago
@CamillaCalamity Not the issue. Unless you have the teaching and guidance of the HS, which you have to be a true Follower of Christ, indwelt, you can not understand the Bible says. All is for His purpose. People do similar things throughout History, but their reasons and motives were selfish. That is the difference. God is a loving God. The Lover of your, mine and all's souls.
Brucev7 3 months ago
@Brucev7 Oh spare me that elitist crap! I am capable of understanding the Bible and so is any scholar. There are people, who are not necessarily Christians, who are Bible experts. They know the language, the translations, and most importantly the historical context. Few Christians have ever studied the Bible objectively. How can they? They have a horse in that race.
CamillaCalamity 3 months ago
@CamillaCalamity But you haven't shown you do. Not about who is more knowledgeable. Y'all always try to spin it that way though. The reference is God's Holy word. And that maybe so, but without the regeneration and will to follow God and by His principles what good is all of their knowledge?
Brucev7 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
idk much about the theory of relativity, but when that guy was corrected about substituting light for mass, he got upset and wanted to change the subject. o_O 2:00
wooowmeato 5 months ago
Comment removed
wooowmeato 5 months ago
Those that belive there is no morality without God, I have two word: Bertrand Russell.
mjfraser04 5 months ago
1 Timothy 1:4 Neither give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which minister questions, rather than godly edifying which is in faith: so do.
shadapple 5 months ago
Dude in black became hostile pretty quick.
DantePattarozzi 5 months ago
The other guy saw his cosmovision being totally destroyed, got upset and left, lol... instead of being humble and understand. That's pride (sin) for you.
2 Corinthians {10:4} (For the weapons of our warfare [are] not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds;) {10:5} Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ;
orlibonurb 5 months ago
"There are no absolutes"
How could you get any funnier than that?
donotresussitate 9 months ago
Chad, you did a great job of interacting with this person. I have experienced this myself and it is quite frustrating, but you kept a cool head. I have found, on both sides of the argument (myself included), that it is very difficult to keep emotions out of a logical argument. When that happens people tend to lash out, just like this person did.
"There are no absolute truths." Funniest thing I've ever heard. The statement is an absolute truth. Keep up the good work, Chad.
SavedNations 9 months ago
So what exactly is his argument: That because we want morality to be objective so badly and faith in God is the only way we can conclude that we should therefore believe in God ?
Isn't that a clear case of the fallacy called "appeal to consequence" ?
MoralityIsAReligion 10 months ago
@MoralityIsAReligion I believe you are correct there. His entire argument up until the end was fairly strong, until he started making his final assertions. This is where the fallacy was used, etc. Just because you can not see how *Insert inconceivable thing* can be lived with, doesn't make it false.
ZaneShadowcast 10 months ago
@MoralityIsAReligion I don't think he's saying that that's WHY we should believe in GOD, just that life would be pretty dumb without GOD. There are other ways to show GOD's existence, one having to do with the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics I believe.
Also, I think he's trying to appeal to general human sense of right and wrong to show that there must be a Lawgiver ("It seems like rape is wrong, so what makes it so?")
georgefrankleroy 10 months ago
@georgefrankleroy
Yeah but what's the point of saying X is dumb if you do not have the intention to change something about X being dumb ? He clearly has the intention to convince people of faith in God because not having faith in God makes life dumb. But that's not an argument. All type of things are dumb. Cancer is dumb, my job is dumb, my bank account balance is dumb. So should I start believing I am rich and immune to cancer ? That's no reasoning at all. It's wishful thinking.
MoralityIsAReligion 9 months ago
I LOVE CHAD this guy is so good. If you dont understand the truth which he is conveing is simply because you dont want to not because he's wrong.
Jorge007dr 10 months ago
Life ONLY has meaning if it's finite, if we only get one life. If life is infinite, then it becomes empty and insignificant. This life is not some test, it's not some means to an end, life is an end in itself. Life has meaning because we only get one, it's precious...
soultorment27 11 months ago
Thats the first time I heard someone say," I don't believe that 1+1=2. I bet he does a little bit of acid and shrooms in his dorm, that's why he's living in a dream where there are no absolutes. It's all an illuuuuuusiooooon.
Danthemanlyman7 11 months ago
Saying something is absoulte without proof is stupid and meaningless.
Everyone can claim to have the absoulte truth ( obviously they do because why belive something you think is false) but that dosent make it true
badpanda84 11 months ago
@badpanda84 "Saying something is absoulte without proof is stupid and meaningless."
When you speak about "proof" do you mean scientific proof
ruleofthespirit 11 months ago
@ruleofthespirit Well yes scientific proof .. or something to back up your claims there you have the truth..
badpanda84 11 months ago
@badpanda84 scientific proof of what, God?
How should I scientifically prove (science measures and tests everything within matter space and time)someone exists who is outside of time and space and is a Spirit ( non-material)?
Here is something for you. Can you scientifically prove that the Pilgrims actually landed on Plymouth rock? If not then according to your standard, its not true and you must campaign to have it removed from the history books, because it is a lie, a deception.
ruleofthespirit 11 months ago
@ruleofthespirit
"If not then according to your standard, its not true and you must campaign to have it removed from the history books"
He didn't say it wasn't true. He seemed to be implying that you'd be more convincing if you had some degree of evidence, you fucker cheeks patty!
UltimateAVGN 5 months ago
the term absoulte truth - or moral -- is only meaningful if the statement can be proven
you can'r prove that murder or rape is wrong --
However you can prove that 1+1=2
badpanda84 11 months ago
I like to beleive in cosmic law
Therein is the problem. He doesn't want to look at or admit there is an absolute moral law but chooses to make up one which suits him.
Its called idolatry, the oldest sin
ruleofthespirit 11 months ago
Chad "1 + 1 is 2 that is true"
The guy with the backpack "I don't believe it either" "Everything is ongoing"
"To say things are absolute makes you a moron"
Oh dear
ruleofthespirit 11 months ago
Dude got all bent out of shape the one time he got interrupted, yet interrupts the other guy throughout the entire debate, so annoying.
scottw182 11 months ago
I dont see science as a proof that there is no God, I see scientific findings as proof of God. Just my opinion. Best wishes to you all, no matter what you choose to believe.
diakoniaable 11 months ago 10
@diakoniaable In my point of view real science is only the discovery of the works of the Creator. Now pseudo science is what we see the most, using real science with human delusion and pride, not accounting all the facts, a human story where God cannot exists to justify all human acts.
andredc16 5 months ago
"There is no absolute truth.'
Is that absolutely true?
Childinfaith 11 months ago
I would like to see a relativist in a math class tell his instructor that there is no absolute answer.
BenjaminWirtz 1 year ago 23
@BenjaminWirtz
Yes, because that is what moral relativism implies.
UltimateAVGN 5 months ago
@BenjaminWirtz actually, math is what we "say is the truth" there is no absolute truth in math, we set up the rules that 1+1=2 etc.
quezcatol 4 months ago
@quezcatol
It can be provably determined, If I put up two fingers, it would always be the same amount, it doesn't matter that I call it, objectively I am holding up the same number of fingers no matter how you look at it.
BenjaminWirtz 4 months ago
@BenjaminWirtz Amen.
Brucev7 3 months ago
@BenjaminWirtz *facepalm* yes because math and morality are obviously interchangeable. Did your brain take a vacation while you were writing that? The funniest part is that even such a ridiculous comparison could actually be used to argue relativism.
apestaartje321 2 months ago 3
@apestaartje321
Math proves there are absolutes true it doesn't prove moral absolutism but it opens up the possibility. Rape is wrong everywhere even if a society says it is OK.
BenjaminWirtz 2 months ago
@BenjaminWirtz Even if there was the slightest connection between mathematics and human judgement, its still nonsense. Math is still just a language we apply to the world around us and its the most reliable, but to think there's anything inherently 'absolute' about it is naieve at best. At some point mathematicians might have thought they had the absolute answer to the surface of a triangle, until non-Euclidian geometry came along. "Rape is wrong" is something you feel, nothing more.
apestaartje321 2 months ago
@BenjaminWirtz A good math prof would answer that a mathematical proof is only valid within the system of axioms set up in order to prove it. Gödel proved that it is impossible to prove that a system is consistent using the axioms of the system itself, thus any mathematical proof is uncertain.
astroboomboy 1 month ago
@stregan7 just because with out a god there may not be objective moral values doesn't mean that god or morality exist! Stop falling victim to the fallacy of wishful thinking.
OpenAirAtheist 1 year ago
The moral law giver -- so basically something is moral because God said so ( of course it depends which God)
badpanda84 1 year ago
@badpanda84 "of course it depends which God"
There are others?
Prove it
ruleofthespirit 11 months ago
@badpanda84 "( of course it depends which God)"
There are others?
Prove it
ruleofthespirit 11 months ago
@ruleofthespirit .. well you can't even prove the is one God .
However there are many religions out there - all of which claims to have to have the absolute the truth and make contradictory statement of God..
So when I say it depends which God -- I really mean it depends which concept of God you are talking about.. ( ie which relgion you follow)
badpanda84 11 months ago
@badpanda84 Have you actually investigated any of them? Have you looked to find out if what they teach is right?If you are genuinely concerned about your eternal future how do you start to find out which is right? The truth is they profoundly contradict each other and will be horrified if you lumped them all into the same band of "all religions and paths lead to a god or God" Jesus said "If you seek Me with all your heart, you will find Me"
Do you really want to find out or not?
ruleofthespirit 11 months ago
@ruleofthespirit The truth is they profoundly contradict each other "
Agreed that is my point -- how is say a Christians claiming to have the truth any different from a Muslim have the truth..
They all claim to have the absolute truth -- clearly only one is correct - therefore there must be a lot of people who are lying when they claim to have the absolute truth.
" Jesus said "If you seek Me with all your heart, you will find Me"
That is assuming that christains is correct
badpanda84 11 months ago
@badpanda84 You haven't answered the question. Have you actually investigated any of them? Have you looked to find out if what they teach is right? Or do you trot this "there are so many, I dont know which is right, so I wont bother with any and if a Christian challenges my lifestyle I will point him to this argument so I don't have to give an answer"
So , which have you bothered to look into and if so, what did you look for in them?
ruleofthespirit 11 months ago
The problem with abosulte truth is that you can prove E=MC2 or 1 +1 =2 ( maybe I'll like to see someone prove that)
But try proving to be that murder is wrong.. or prove to me that rape is wrong.
You can't -- all you can say is that in my opinion murder is wrong
badpanda84 1 year ago
No such thing as objective morals.
Otherwise explain how slavery acceptable 2000 years ago but not today
badpanda84 1 year ago
@badpanda84 *200 years ago + estd 12m slaves still around
torstenfrostII 1 year ago
@torstenfrostII OK maybe I should repharse that.
otherwise explain how slavery in not acceptable in western culture ( eg the US) where as it was acceptable in bibical times
badpanda84 1 year ago
@badpanda84 Mate I agree - I'm just pointing out that a) this shit was completely acceptable more recently than we imagine; if you want something that was only acceptable 2,000 years ago, have a look at the Ancient Greek model of the family and b) though we tell ourselves we're free of this, we've moved on, in reality slavery may continue to exist where we think it's eradicated. Just how free are 'illegals' in the States to quit their often atrociously-paid jobs in terrible conditions?
torstenfrostII 1 year ago
can someone please help this guy 1 +1 = 2 wow i cant believe how ridiculous this guy is please help him.......
bluecrew3 1 year ago
Also if I were u I would make a response video to my refutation videos because the longer u delay the more it makes me and others think that your not sincere! And I wouldn't like to think that about u.
jstillwell1980 1 year ago
Yes I Agee the relativistic guy was acting a fool ! But Chad just because you say there can't be meaning to life or an objective standard of morality with out your God doesnt make meaning, morality,or your god pop into existence! Thats a logical fallacy of wishful thinking.
jstillwell1980 1 year ago
@jstillwell1980 What else is able to give an objective moral law?
stregan7 1 year ago
The best film - a family about moral relativism is "The Godchild". You can see it if you search for the film on the web. "The truth never changes".
huntergrantzuzana 1 year ago
The karma guy is an idiot.
AbsurdMark 1 year ago
Buddy got mad and left because he realized he was in over his head, he himself was wrong, and he didn;t like it
JPBuysjr 1 year ago
It was going so well until the thoughtless 'lawgiver' rubbish - rubbish that can be refuted with one word in those United States: SLAVERY.
torstenfrostII 1 year ago
@torstenfrostII ?
JayMerc75 1 year ago
@torstenfrostII
I think that proves the point more than refutes it.
Can you expound on that?
philfish120 1 year ago
@philfish120 @JayMerc75 If God were responsible for people's morals and ensuring they knew what was right, how did humans not know that slavery, that constant millstone on the States, was wrong? The great Mr Carlin, as always, expresses it better than I can: ?v=kQ7XFvniWWE
torstenfrostII 1 year ago
@torstenfrostII
Human nature. Ever since sin entered into the world, men have been selfish. If left to themselves they will do whats best for them no matter what it does to somebody else.
I think that many of the slave owners in the early days of the United States knew that slavery was wrong, they just chose to ignore it because it worked for them.
philfish120 1 year ago
@philfish120 If god created the world & humans in his image, and sin entered, then the fault is with the creator. It can be no other way.
How precisely do you think humans rose to prominence if not by cooperating and suppressing selfishness?
The historical evidence suggests most slaveowners saw little wrong with it - the argument was that every society needed a mud-sill class, so better the 'inferior' blacks than wage-slaved Northern whites (see Watson, Conflict and Collaboration, 1985, p275)
torstenfrostII 1 year ago
@torstenfrostII
He created them in his own image, but he also gave them a choice: to obey or disobey. Adam disobeyed, so every human is now born a hedonist.
The thing is, every person is born with God's law inside them. They know what is right and wrong. We also have the power of reason. Anyone can see that you won't get anywhere by just stealing and killing. So they cooperate because they need to.
Some of the things I've read say differently, but that's besides the point.
philfish120 1 year ago
@philfish120 The problem remains: if Adam (doesn't evolution interfere with this story?) chose disobedience, and the way he made decisions, his reason, and his 'will' were set up by god, god is still at fault. What kind of vindictive man sets up a test - the fruit of knowledge - that he knows his subjects will fail?
Again, the question is: if we know right from wrong b/c of god, why was slavery introduced in the first place? Why do some people think gays are evil, and others they're fine?
torstenfrostII 1 year ago
@torstenfrostII
First of all, I don't believe in evolution, but please don't try to start a debate on that because I'm sure that will go nowhere.
Do you think it would have been better if he didn't give him the choice? God loved us, and he wanted us to want to love him back. That means giving us a choice. Some decide to love him, some decide to hate him.
Because since Adam, man has decided what is right in his own eyes. They have altogether turned away from God's law, and do what they want.
philfish120 1 year ago
@philfish120 Yeah, I imagine it would go nowhere. Cardinal Bellarmine's words will suffice: 'To assert that the earth revolves around the sun is as erroneous as to claim that Jesus was not born of a virgin.'
The problem with this choice idea is that the idea we have a free spirit, independent of our brains and reason, that can make these choices looks increasingly unlikely. Even if we did have spirits, god must've created them - in his own image. Still, the problem remains - why make us flawed?
torstenfrostII 1 year ago
Awesome Chad... I like the way you've taken the Bill Craig type of thing to the open air box...
CIT166162 1 year ago
the spirit of pride is damning. it's like ppl are rejecting objective reality & deliberately espousing the creed of irrationality, and for what? because we hate accountability? are we evolving or devolving? a psychopath can not see past his own subjective light & that's what we have: a world full of psychopaths.
sKewbrain 1 year ago
@sKewbrain The ramblings of a mad man! You sound like your giving a talk to a room full of drugged up hippies right before you all commit suicide. I admit, the first time I read that I didn't think much of it. But, the second time its like "what a load of utter incoherent bullshit..." Amazing!! Well done!!
TruthThink1 1 year ago
@TruthThink1 lolz thanks for proving my point. isn't anybody real these days? I hate excuses & self-deceiving fantasy & I rly never gave a damn about popular opinion. It is what it is so pride/denial is lame & weak in my eyes. all bs aside, you know Im right about the last comment. look how peaceful the guy was at first until he was hit with conviction, then he turned all hateful. like a junky in denial.
I'd rather hear straight forward absolutes than to live under a convenient deception.
sKewbrain 1 year ago
@sKewbrain This Chad guy thinks he is come kind of profound philosopher on a mission to free people from the chains of their own subjective worldview. The guy is just a sophist, and a bad one at that. He keeps trying to pull metaphysical trumpcards to shore up his notions of how HE perceives the world, when actually his logic doesn't stand up to the smallest of scrutiny. The guy was annoyed by the endless string of outrageous and fallacious claims - nothing to do with denial.
TruthThink1 1 year ago
@TruthThink1 "how HE perceives the world" he's not spewing opinion or relative "needs" he's giving the biblical worldview which is far outside of human opinion. humans being liars by nature will discern temporal convenience from inconvenience & that's the basic thinking of the carnal man: survival of the fittest. that's called "lust." the spiritual man's discernment is between truth & error no matter how it effects his pleasures & emotions. he knows *ultimate* truth to be absolute.
sKewbrain 1 year ago
@TruthThink1 Meanwhile some rapist, paedophile-druggie is allowed to do whatever the hell they want. But that is the way the world is, unfortunately. People don't like accountability and that is going to be a HUGE problem which society needs to surmount (somehow) if we are going to progress into the 22nd century. And on all levels, political, social and personal. But that said, I don't think rejecting objective reality is the problem. Social and moral decay is far more complex.
TruthThink1 1 year ago
@TruthThink1 "his logic doesn't stand up to the smallest of scrutiny" exactly. which is why he denies his own understanding & takes the premise of a Holy first cause. you can't ration our understandings of reality without it. the guy wasnt annoyed because Chad didn't make sense. he got angry because he felt shame & didn't want to deal with the conviction. btw even if u dont believe in biblical Prophecy, understand that the leaders of this system do & they're determined to fulfil it by all means
sKewbrain 1 year ago
@sKewbrain Something else.. I'm sorry if I came across a bit strong in my previous message. To be honest, you seem to be a pretty smart and sincere guy and there aren't enough of people like that around imo. And I can kind of see your point, people are blinded by their emotion and lack of understanding of the world. I hate people that lead a selfish and immoral life - its such a waste! So many good people that are dying in the world would give anything to have a second chance.
TruthThink1 1 year ago
@sKewbrain People know the difference between right and wrong, and if they don't know, they aught to know. That doesn't mean that a "moral law giver" is responsible for deciding what is right and what is wrong. We know, as a human being we know that rape is wrong, the genesis of while I would suggest is biological - in that we do not like PAIN. Equally therefore, inflicting pain on others, whether physical or emotional is wrong.
TruthThink1 1 year ago
@TruthThink1 "That doesn't mean that a "moral law giver" is responsible" why not? if there's law, there is a lawgiver. it's foundational to the very basics of cause-effect reasoning that separates man from beast. lol that sounds kinda cliche, but true 4 the most part. we don't have to "learn" shame, guilt, conviction etc... we have a moral conscience that other animals don't have. without a first cause that's moral itself, that's probably not possible.
sKewbrain 1 year ago
@TruthThink1 Your argument is false if there is no God than the law is given by man. So if a judge or government says it is the law that you can commit murder than murder is no longer wrong. And you state that we know what is wrong but I can give you an example of why that makes no sense. Gladiator games where held in the roman empire where millions committed murder no one look at it as wrong it was sport. Rome conquered land raping and enslaving people no one in Rome look at it as wrong.
JayMerc75 1 year ago
@sKewbrain We have the right to freedom and to do what we want, so long as we don't jeopardise the rights of OTHERS in the process. I.e the right to happiness, quiet enjoyment, property etc.
I enjoy listening to music, I receive great happiness from it. I have a RIGHT to that happiness, however there are obvious restrictive covenants to that right. I might enjoy my music really loud, but that happiness is to the detriment of someone else - which is wrong. That applies to every vice.
TruthThink1 1 year ago
@TruthThink1 to the standard of God(whole goodness), we have no rights. We made nothing, ordained nothing & change nothing. but that's on the ultimate scale. relatively, as you're saying, our rights are determined by man. in that case, you're right. but without an ultimate lawgiver that's sovereign to the entropic reality, there's no standard outside of man's law & therefore no reason why a selfish person should submit to man's laws. with that "If you dont get caught, it's not a crime."
sKewbrain 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Chad: I absolutely love watching your debates/presentations. What a great job you do. I would like to make a request. I watch your videos in my home and my children stand over my shoulder a lot of the time. This is the first video I've come across that foul language has not been bleeped out and it shocked me! Is it possible to censor out foul language so that I don't have to worry about my kids' ears? That'd be great! Keep up the good fight, Chad!!
debrasusan73 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Chad: I absolutely love watching your debates/presentations. What a great job you do. I would like to make a request. I watch your videos in my home and my children stand over my shoulder a lot of the time. This is the first video I've come across that foul language has not been bleeped out and it shocked me! Is it possible to censor out foul language so that I don't have to worry about my kids' ears? That'd be great! Keep up the good fight, Chad!!
debrasusan73 1 year ago
Chad: I absolutely love watching your debates/presentations. What a great job you do. I would like to make a request. I watch your videos in my home and my children stand over my shoulder a lot of the time. This is the first video I've come across that foul language has not been bleeped out and it shocked me! Is it possible to censor out foul language so that I don't have to worry about my kids' ears? That'd be great! Keep up the good fight, Chad!!
debrasusan73 1 year ago
He absolutely claimed that truth is not absolute and now he's claiming all things are an illusion and the claims that's true also?This atheist keeps over turning himself.
CBALLEN 1 year ago
If that is the case then I refuse to engage in conversation with you. I sincerely hope that you find your way in this world and realise that you don't need religion to be be a good man. We are so lucky to be alive, in a time full of overwhelming possibility. Don't waste the time you have searching for something that doesn't exist when the evidence is right in front of you. Good luck, see you when you get there.
Regards,
W
TruthThink1 1 year ago
Ex cultu robur.
TruthThink1 1 year ago
I would probably make a joke about it - "In my defence, God, you cant seriously expect someone to believe in you based purely on ancient folklore which has been badly translated."
"Also one final thing, God, or shall I call you Jahweh? Do you not think that the Bible is due for a 2nd edition any time soon? I'm thinking maybe an eBook, probably better fot the environment, than paper? OR maybe an Audiobook (for the people you decided should be blind)?"
TruthThink1 1 year ago
@TruthThink1 "ancient folklore which has been badly translated."
You are being arbitrary. How do you know this to be true? Personal note: you can get the Bible on e-book or audio book.
TheObservationDeck 1 year ago
@TheObservationDeck Had the Bible have been a little more pellucid in its content: perhaps the Judeo-Christian regimes would not have taken the lives of an uncountable number of people. Perhaps the Pope wouldn't have rounded up the Knight Templar and executed them. Maybe hundreds of thousands of people wouldn't have died during the Crusades. Maybe the Thirty Years War wouldn't have happened. Maybe the endless bloodshed during the Dark Ages and the Inquisition wouldn't have happened.
TruthThink1 1 year ago
@TheObservationDeck You are, frankly, delusional if you think that the Bible is a genuine and accurate account of historic events. And what remains even more bizarre is that you discard elegant explanations (evolution) and instead embrace the idea that instead, you came from a dirt man and rib woman. I want you to answer this and I want a straight answer:
Do you really think that "God" made a man out of some dirt and a woman out of a rib - those people inbred and that is where people come from?
TruthThink1 1 year ago
I know which person I would rather be. And in the highly unlikely event I stand in front of a white gate when I die, I would like to think that people get recognised for who they are and what they DO - not what they believe in. I would also hope that I would be forgiven for thinking that God doesn't exist, seeing that there isn't a single shred of evidence to convince me otherwise.
TruthThink1 1 year ago
@SubconsciousGatherer It seems strange that people that do not believe in God are sent to hell. Meanwhile those that have killed and tortured in the name of God are rewarded. They go to heaven: a perfect place with angels! And trumpets! Meanwhile, the significant few that dedicated their lives trying change the world and make it a better place and did all the good they can - they are eternally punished. And these people burn in hell forever.
TruthThink1 1 year ago
@TruthThink1 "Meanwhile those that have killed and tortured in the name of God are rewarded......
You are misrepresenting the worldview you argue against. If you're fine with that continue along....
TheObservationDeck 1 year ago
And when you look at the bible: it says that god created the heavens and the earth in 7 days and then created man. But we now know that various species existed on this planet long before we did. So why were dinosaurs omitted from the biblical creation story? Because MAN wrote the bible and the existence of dinosaurs was not common knowledge when it was written. And yet the bible is seen as an acceptable authority for some reason. We have a word for "unicorn", but that doesn't mean one existed.
TruthThink1 1 year ago
@TruthThink1
I have a better question. Why are you assuming that dinosaurs are omitted from the biblical creation story? I'll take a guess as to why you assume this... because the word "dinosaur" isn't in Genesis right? Nevermind that the word "dinosaur" wasn't even used until the 1800s but hey, TruthThink1 wants 21st-century language to appear in ancient texts in order for him to understand it.
TheObservationDeck 1 year ago
@TheObservationDeck Well one thing's for sure. Donkeys and snakes can talk. We know this, thanks to the Bible. Still, I don't know anyone who's ever witnessed such an event, but don't think about it too hard. You might start thinking it's a load of bull.
SubconsciousGatherer 1 year ago
@SubconsciousGatherer
"Donkeys and snakes can talk."
The Bible does not claim donkeys and snakes talk on their own. These are supernatural events of which you presuppose cannot happen along with the existence of God, and other spiritual beings.
“I don't know anyone who's ever witnessed such an event”
So your logic is if you haven't witnessed it, it hasn't happened right?
TheObservationDeck 1 year ago
@TheObservationDeck I do not believe in supernatural events for the simple fact that no one (and I mean NO ONE) has any evidence that the supernatural exists. You can't just claim it does, then start from there that anything's possible (the theist mind frame essentially).
Re: Part 2, No. You are the one misrepresenting ME. I've never known anyone to witness a talking donkey or snake, so the correct stance is to maintain it's not happened until evidence concludes otherwise.
SubconsciousGatherer 1 year ago
Bearing in mind religion is something borne from the ancient world. To me it seems inconceivable that people still allow themselves to get hung up this way in the 21st century. People actually think that Jonah was swallowed up by a GIANT FISH for THREE DAYS. Philosopher David Hume quite rightly points out that such miracles are used to convince people that an imperceptible agent exists: when actually any testimony lacks honesty, intelligence and EDUCATION.
TruthThink1 1 year ago
@TruthThink1
When I see atheists argue like this I can't help but wonder if they understand in any way the scientific theories that they hold dear to. They are clearly just as blind as they claim their God believing opponents to be. I mean, do you understand that Stephen Hawking's presuppositions necessitate his conclusions. His thesis is grounded in metaphysical philosophy none of which can be confirmed through observational data? Anything but God right?
TheObservationDeck 1 year ago
The journalist Andrew Mueller is of the opinion that pledging yourself to any particular religion ‘is no more or less weird than choosing to believe that the world is rhombus-shaped, and borne through the cosmos in the pincers of two enormous green lobsters called Esmerelda and Keith.’
TruthThink1 1 year ago
@TruthThink1
Everyone is entitled to their opinion but what you have just quoted from Andrew Mueller is nothing more than that and it carries no weight. I hope that you understand the difference between an opinion and truth.
TheObservationDeck 1 year ago
Finally, light doesn't have a mass. And this goes back to the point I made prior, because Chad, and many people like him misuse "science" and "philosophy" to convince impressionable people that they know what they are talking about, when actually they don't. People are too quick to let someone tell them what they want to hear and not listen to autonomous reason within themselves.
TruthThink1 1 year ago
@TheObservationDeck In response to your comments regarding the ethics. I would suggest that it is indeed immoral to use MONEY to lure people into a debate on a street corner. Especially, when Chad knows that it is impossible to pass the "good person test". That looks like deception to me. And thats why 7:15 is bleeped out.
The guys says "keep your 20 bucks okay"
Hmmmm =)
TruthThink1 1 year ago
@TruthThink1
So if Chad did not give money away, would his debating techniques then become moral in your eyes? Do you realize he gives people five dollars for failing the test? And how are you in a position to determine what is moral?
TheObservationDeck 1 year ago
"Science" by definition is a free market of open thought which encourages people to think for themselves; the "body" of science ironically will always continue to evolve as technology and the human capacity increases over time.
I would not be surprised if "Science" does eventually uncover metaphysical phenomena which our existing technology cannot detect. However, we must still remain rational and explore possible explanations for something rather than look for an easy way out.
Regards,
W
TruthThink1 1 year ago
@TruthThink1 said: “Science by definition is a free market of open thought which encourages people to think for themselves”
This is not a description of science.
TheObservationDeck 1 year ago
Additionally, I would recommend that we steer clear of similar arguments like whether or not the universe is infinite. Science would suggest that the universe is NOT infinite. Yet immediately a nonsensical counter claim comes about like:
The universe must be infinite! Because there must be something at the very edge of the universe, there cant just be a wall? So whats on the other side of the wall?
We all seem like intelligent and well-read people, so lets keep this high brow please =)
TruthThink1 1 year ago
Comment removed
TruthThink1 1 year ago
@TheObservationDeck If the atheist were to suggest that the universe did have a beginning then the immediate counterargument would be: how can something appear out of nothing? And the theist would instantly proclaim that something must have caused the universe to come into existence. And the atheist then explains: then who created the creator? And so the adolescent argument goes on and on ad infinitum.
TruthThink1 1 year ago
@TruthThink1
All do respect.
If you're going to contend to keep these arguments intelligent and "highbrow" I would suggest you stop calling people's arguments "adolescent and nonsensical." If you have nothing to add to the argument other than your personal suggestion to steer clear of it I would kindly suggest you take your advice and steer clear.
TheObservationDeck 1 year ago
@rationalresponder Oh, and change the record ;)
TruthThink1 1 year ago
@rationalresponder If you believe in god then fine, but it remains immoral to spin out scientific and philosophical propaganda to try and brainwash people that are obviously impressionable.
And religion has always been that way. It keeps the mob under control and can be used to convince people to go into battle where they are sure to die. Look at the Dark Ages, the Crusades and the Inquisition. All of which were condoned by the POPE. A church I am sure you are all proud to be a part of!
;)
TruthThink1 1 year ago
@TruthThink1
So your reasoning is that Chad is wrong because he is guilty by association right?
Regarding your first statement about immorality. Would you hold the scientific community to the same standards you hold Chad to?
By the way, you misrepresent Chad by claiming he is "a part of" the Catholic Church. Please try to refrain from misrepresentations.
TheObservationDeck 1 year ago
soooooo many fallacies in his arguments
jtoddguelph 1 year ago
And how can they preach unless they are sent? As it is written, “How beautiful are the feet of those who bring good news!”
OutkastPHX 1 year ago
Chad continue PREACHING Brother!:) Good Job! Jesus Loves YOu!
ericgina3in1 1 year ago
1+1 is 2 that is true. But what more than mathematics handles with absolute truths? Math is the only thing that does that, its the purest method in science there is. How ever, math is not part of the physical realm its just a system that we created. Its a concept and not a real thing. So in physical reality there still is no absoutes.
peronkop 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@peronkop said "So in physical reality there still is no absoutes."
You have just made an absolute truth statement which contradicts your argument.
TheObservationDeck 1 year ago
That whole spiel was pointless. You still didn't demonstrate that there was an objective right and wrong, you just gave an "argument" from emotion ("Wow, so Hitler wasn't objectively wrong") You still haven't demonstrated that morality is objective.
redsaint182 1 year ago
@redsaint182 he kept being interupted, and eventually the guy left before he could finish making his final point.
diuryl 1 year ago
@diuryl And what point is that?
redsaint182 1 year ago
@redsaint182
good question.
diuryl 1 year ago
Wow, the guy on the left really deserves a lot of those laughs. I don't support the specific position of either of the debaters, but the guy on the right totally did better than the guy on the left.
DreamwaIker 1 year ago
Funny how that guy believes that a rapist isn't actually wrong, but he thinks that you are wrong, Chad.
LoveStruckTonight 1 year ago
I hate how the street preacher keeps bringing up rapists and baby killers as a way to say "those are the bad guys" when those are the very people his religion says CAN get into heaven. His god will forgive ANYTHING you do as long as you repent and trust on Jesus. All these "wrongs" he's talking about will NOT keep you out of heaven. His god welcomes all kinds. Disgusting.
SubconsciousGatherer 1 year ago
@SubconsciousGatherer
Do you think that forgiveness is disgusting?
TheObservationDeck 1 year ago
@TheObservationDeck Not at all. What's disgusting is the idea that you can do whatever you want, then ask Jesus to forgive you and then get into heaven. it's all BS, but I'm put off by the fact that some people believe it.
SubconsciousGatherer 1 year ago
@SubconsciousGatherer
So if you committed a crime (be it credit card fraud) and you were sentenced to three years in jail with bail of $40,000 would you be put off if someone came to bail you out if you knew in your heart that you would never want to do it again? And, your statement above about what Christianity is and how to get into heaven is a misrepresentation of biblical principles. And, how have you come to know that it is, "all BS." And, why does it matter if some people believe it?
TheObservationDeck 1 year ago
@TheObservationDeck If I commit a crime, I should be obligated to pay the consequences. If I can't, then that's my fault. If someone wants to pay my fine, that is their choice, but how absurd they should think I owe them something in return. That's not help, that's close to blackmail. How did I misrepresent the Bible? Is it not true you can be a wretched person all your life, ask Jesus to forgive you, then go to heaven? I don't like people believing in things they can't prove.
SubconsciousGatherer 1 year ago
@SubconsciousGatherer
The Bible clearly teaches that not everyone enters heaven just because they claim to believe in God (Mat 7:21-23).
Can you prove everything you believe in?
TheObservationDeck 1 year ago
@TheObservationDeck I'm an atheist, so quoting from the Bible makes as much sense to me as if you'd read me a fortune cookie. Just because it's written in a book does not make it true. Even so, you can interpret the Bible to say whatever you like (and Christians certainly do, you'll have to agree). No, I probably can't prove EVERYTHING I believe in, but the stuff I can't prove is of no consequence, and I certainly don't tell others they have to accept that belief (like Christians do).
SubconsciousGatherer 1 year ago
@SubconsciousGatherer
I'm not asking you to believe in Christianity. I am showing you that you are misrepresenting it in your argumentation. I also hope that you would hold yourself to the same standards that you judge another worldview with. To be an atheist, you have to believe some pretty unbelievable and very unprovable things and I think the things that you cannot prove are of great consequence.
TheObservationDeck 1 year ago
@TheObservationDeck The atheist position simply rejects the claim of there being a god. It does not answer or explain or claim knowledge of anything. It just abstains from the claim of there being a god to explain things. If you can prove your god, then the atheist can be convinced and will change beliefs. Can you?
SubconsciousGatherer 1 year ago
@SubconsciousGatherer
Okay, in your atheistic position, is the universe eternal or did it have a beginning?
TheObservationDeck 1 year ago
@TheObservationDeck First of all, just to clarify, atheism has no position regarding anything BUT the lack of a belief in gods. Secondly, our best science has found that the current universe did in fact have a beginning, but we have yet to find out what happened prior to the Big Bang. It's possible that before that moment there was a previous universe, and before that, another. Existence, therefore, may in fact be eternal, with no beginning.
SubconsciousGatherer 1 year ago
@SubconsciousGatherer
So regardless of the fact that you do not believe in God (your atheistic position), which scientific theory do you personally subscribe to? Big Bang, Infinite Universe Regression, Panspermia, intergalactic ballistic missiles, etc.?
TheObservationDeck 1 year ago
@TheObservationDeck Big Bang, plus the idea that the universe(s) i.e. existence, is eternal. No gods required. Gods don't answer anything, they only add more mystery and can't be backed up with any evidence.
SubconsciousGatherer 1 year ago
@SubconsciousGatherer
The Big Bang requires a beginning. An eternal universe does not require a beginning. You can't have it both ways, it would be contradictory. So does the universe have a beginning or not in your opinion.
TheObservationDeck 1 year ago