There is no evidence besides the bible that jesus even existed, no credible historians during that time noted him, these guys are full of BULLSHIT. Dont let their big wors fool you.
If Jesus never existed, how do we explain that Christianity had spread throughout the Roman empire by the time the New Testament was finished, during the lifetime of those who would have known He was a myth?
Actually, there are writings of early church fathers that quote from every book in the NT, so it had to be finished first. The Nicene Council confirmed the NT as we have it in 325, so you could use that date, but even liberal scholars would agree by consensus that the last book was written by 100. There are over 5000 complete NT Greek manuscripts. The discussion of when the NT was finished is really not that controversial. Can you think of anyone who even brought it up until the 19th century?
Not that i have any kind of degree, I just reasearch these things out of curiosity. and as insightfull this is it doesnt convince me. Biblical times were poorly documented and people were savages. I find it pretty hard to believe that a guy could go around and convince people that he is doing "miracles". I think its much moe likely that a group of people made it up to gain power through the promise of eternal salvation.
And yet everyone of the eyewitness apostles, who were in position to know if the resurrection was a fabrication, died as a result, and had no interest in political power. While many have been willing to die for what they believed in, no one will die for what they know to be a lie. When I read the writings of the early church fathers and guys like St. Augustine, I'm blown away by their intellect rather than their savagery.
How do Chrisitians find purpose in Christianity? So you make it to heaven great you glorify God Ok what then? Glorifying God seems rather arbitary and purposeless? Heaven seems like an insufferable bore you never die nothing changes how can life have meaning if there is no death?
that is an ignorant assumption, that heaven is boring and that glorifying god seems purposeless. you have answered yourself there - glorifying god means you can get to heaven. the bible (and in fact any religious text that deals with heaven) describes heaven as incredible endless pleasure. assuming it will be boring is just you applying HUAMAN thoughts and ideals to something far beyond human understanding, and humans as a whole. yet thanks to jesus we can make it to heaven to be with him
These people are maniplulating the foolish. Their logic is backward and biased. It is a LIE that most atheists and skeptics agree that the resurrection of christ is a certainty. Complete rubbish. The bible is a group of age old myths that have been binded togehter in the old and new testament. Christians believe the world to be 10000 yrs old or less. It is proven to be 3-4 billion yrs old. This is manipulation.
they aren't backward or manipulative. they are presenting genuine info in a calm way. you clearly are ignorant to the facts since you dont produce your own evidence, or you are just shouting because you simply dont agree. also, many chistians believe the earth is millions of years old. believing this does no damage to christianity at all. some believe that the earth is young. so what? that is a very minor point that has very little or no bearing on their argument and subsequent evidence.
Allso calculating odds on things allready happened is as dumb as throwin pack of cards to ground and then collecting them and after it praising how miracleous it was that the cards came up just in the order they did ! what are the odds of that happening again !
If the cards were thrown into the air and came down in aperfect stack and in perfect sequence, would you not expect that David Blaine was somewhere in the picture?
If infact what you say would happen, yes, it would be as pointles of calculating the odds of that after it had happened as it is concernin anything that happens. There are actually things happening right now that have smaller chance than that if calculated afterwards.
no, i'm just asking if you would presuppose intelligence, ie David Blaine. if the cards came out perfectly, which even 5.6 billion years would not produce, then we might be reasonable to see intelligence. Of course, then there's Dawkins who tells us that it all just looks designed, but isnt.
Dan, what books have you read? If you've read The Blind Watchmaker then you would have an understanding that the molecular cards for which you poorly analogized weren't limited to 1 deck, and most assuredly they weren't limited to 1 throw at a time. There were trillions of decks being thrown about trillions of times simultaneously. Sooner or later, and much sooner than you would anticipate, you'll have a perfectly stacked deck sans designer.
hey sorry for the delay. anyway, i have read parts of the blind watchmaker, but the refutations have been more convincing. of course you are right about the number of cards being played, but from what i have read i just cant see what prevents us from looking at the probability of intelligence behind it. specifically why would we think that it is the result of macroevolution?
Im sorry, but this is just stupidity, If the natural laws as we know them would have been of different magnitude, universe would just be diffrent, we cant say it wouldnt have had life. Most likely not life as we know it, but who knows what other possibilityes there could have been...
Actually, the point is that even atheistic evolutionary scientists agree that without the fine tuning, which they still attribute to chance, no life would have existed. Check out Anthony Flew's website. The world's leading atheist became a deist over this very issue.
No he didnt, you might want to check: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antony_Flew for example before spreading more lies about the subject. Allso what scientists are you talking about? names pls. This actually isnt anything science has taken any stance for, its just common sense, diffren natural laws would have greated diffrent kind of universe, something we cant even imagine, or on other hand, mayby nothing. As said before, calculatin chances to things allready happen is totally pointles.
Would like to specify on my comment in the matter of Antont Flew, and point out that he rejected the fine tuning argument in march 2005. You failed to mention that because of...?
"Why is intelligent design having such a hard time in the acedemic world?"
Dan, it's not science. Want to know how many peer reviewed papers have been submitted within the scientific community by intelligent design advocates?
Zero.
Let's assume that evolution is wrong for a second. What provable science would you teach? Your guest is making an extremely crappy appeal to personal incredulity.
if you will email me your address at danielarsenault@bellsouth.net, so it wont be public, i'll send you a book full of articles reviewed by peers, thoughadmittedly they have difficulty getting published. The publsher's fear losing their jobs. At any rate, if you'd readsome books, I'd get them to you.
/watch?v=fFH0khjgA0U
TheHonestTheist 2 years ago
2 words:
Weasel program.
Look it up.
swyft187 3 years ago
There is no evidence besides the bible that jesus even existed, no credible historians during that time noted him, these guys are full of BULLSHIT. Dont let their big wors fool you.
zam319 4 years ago
Not entirely true. There is evidence of Jesus outside the bible. check it out!!
BSwitzerland 4 years ago 4
Have, there is none execpt of the fact that records say someone named jesus was crucified which is not nearly evidence enough for any sane person.
zam319 4 years ago
If Jesus never existed, how do we explain that Christianity had spread throughout the Roman empire by the time the New Testament was finished, during the lifetime of those who would have known He was a myth?
darsenault 3 years ago
And how do we know when the new testiment was finished? Its been revised hundreds of times.
zam319 3 years ago
Actually, there are writings of early church fathers that quote from every book in the NT, so it had to be finished first. The Nicene Council confirmed the NT as we have it in 325, so you could use that date, but even liberal scholars would agree by consensus that the last book was written by 100. There are over 5000 complete NT Greek manuscripts. The discussion of when the NT was finished is really not that controversial. Can you think of anyone who even brought it up until the 19th century?
darsenault 3 years ago
Not that i have any kind of degree, I just reasearch these things out of curiosity. and as insightfull this is it doesnt convince me. Biblical times were poorly documented and people were savages. I find it pretty hard to believe that a guy could go around and convince people that he is doing "miracles". I think its much moe likely that a group of people made it up to gain power through the promise of eternal salvation.
zam319 3 years ago
And yet everyone of the eyewitness apostles, who were in position to know if the resurrection was a fabrication, died as a result, and had no interest in political power. While many have been willing to die for what they believed in, no one will die for what they know to be a lie. When I read the writings of the early church fathers and guys like St. Augustine, I'm blown away by their intellect rather than their savagery.
darsenault 3 years ago
How do Chrisitians find purpose in Christianity? So you make it to heaven great you glorify God Ok what then? Glorifying God seems rather arbitary and purposeless? Heaven seems like an insufferable bore you never die nothing changes how can life have meaning if there is no death?
warrennenslin 4 years ago
that is an ignorant assumption, that heaven is boring and that glorifying god seems purposeless. you have answered yourself there - glorifying god means you can get to heaven. the bible (and in fact any religious text that deals with heaven) describes heaven as incredible endless pleasure. assuming it will be boring is just you applying HUAMAN thoughts and ideals to something far beyond human understanding, and humans as a whole. yet thanks to jesus we can make it to heaven to be with him
deadpooldan 4 years ago 2
These people are maniplulating the foolish. Their logic is backward and biased. It is a LIE that most atheists and skeptics agree that the resurrection of christ is a certainty. Complete rubbish. The bible is a group of age old myths that have been binded togehter in the old and new testament. Christians believe the world to be 10000 yrs old or less. It is proven to be 3-4 billion yrs old. This is manipulation.
Cobrakane 5 years ago
they aren't backward or manipulative. they are presenting genuine info in a calm way. you clearly are ignorant to the facts since you dont produce your own evidence, or you are just shouting because you simply dont agree. also, many chistians believe the earth is millions of years old. believing this does no damage to christianity at all. some believe that the earth is young. so what? that is a very minor point that has very little or no bearing on their argument and subsequent evidence.
deadpooldan 4 years ago
What if there are many other universes with many other constants? Or what if the Big Bang theory turns out to be false?
whateverfloats 5 years ago
Allso calculating odds on things allready happened is as dumb as throwin pack of cards to ground and then collecting them and after it praising how miracleous it was that the cards came up just in the order they did ! what are the odds of that happening again !
Timppa99 5 years ago
If the cards were thrown into the air and came down in aperfect stack and in perfect sequence, would you not expect that David Blaine was somewhere in the picture?
darsenault 5 years ago
If infact what you say would happen, yes, it would be as pointles of calculating the odds of that after it had happened as it is concernin anything that happens. There are actually things happening right now that have smaller chance than that if calculated afterwards.
Timppa99 5 years ago
Oh and perfect sequence is just as likely to happen as any other predetermined sequence.
Timppa99 5 years ago
David Blaine is an illusionist. If you're asking whether or not I would presuppose supernatural intervention, then no.
sackman11 5 years ago
no, i'm just asking if you would presuppose intelligence, ie David Blaine. if the cards came out perfectly, which even 5.6 billion years would not produce, then we might be reasonable to see intelligence. Of course, then there's Dawkins who tells us that it all just looks designed, but isnt.
darsenault 5 years ago
Dan, what books have you read? If you've read The Blind Watchmaker then you would have an understanding that the molecular cards for which you poorly analogized weren't limited to 1 deck, and most assuredly they weren't limited to 1 throw at a time. There were trillions of decks being thrown about trillions of times simultaneously. Sooner or later, and much sooner than you would anticipate, you'll have a perfectly stacked deck sans designer.
sackman11 5 years ago
hey sorry for the delay. anyway, i have read parts of the blind watchmaker, but the refutations have been more convincing. of course you are right about the number of cards being played, but from what i have read i just cant see what prevents us from looking at the probability of intelligence behind it. specifically why would we think that it is the result of macroevolution?
dan
darsenault 5 years ago
Im sorry, but this is just stupidity, If the natural laws as we know them would have been of different magnitude, universe would just be diffrent, we cant say it wouldnt have had life. Most likely not life as we know it, but who knows what other possibilityes there could have been...
Timppa99 5 years ago
Actually, the point is that even atheistic evolutionary scientists agree that without the fine tuning, which they still attribute to chance, no life would have existed. Check out Anthony Flew's website. The world's leading atheist became a deist over this very issue.
dan
darsenault 5 years ago
No he didnt, you might want to check: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antony_Flew for example before spreading more lies about the subject. Allso what scientists are you talking about? names pls. This actually isnt anything science has taken any stance for, its just common sense, diffren natural laws would have greated diffrent kind of universe, something we cant even imagine, or on other hand, mayby nothing. As said before, calculatin chances to things allready happen is totally pointles.
Timppa99 5 years ago
Would like to specify on my comment in the matter of Antont Flew, and point out that he rejected the fine tuning argument in march 2005. You failed to mention that because of...?
Timppa99 5 years ago
great video. makes a lot of sense
jsalmons77 5 years ago
"Why is intelligent design having such a hard time in the acedemic world?"
Dan, it's not science. Want to know how many peer reviewed papers have been submitted within the scientific community by intelligent design advocates?
Zero.
Let's assume that evolution is wrong for a second. What provable science would you teach? Your guest is making an extremely crappy appeal to personal incredulity.
sackman11 5 years ago
if you will email me your address at danielarsenault@bellsouth.net, so it wont be public, i'll send you a book full of articles reviewed by peers, thoughadmittedly they have difficulty getting published. The publsher's fear losing their jobs. At any rate, if you'd readsome books, I'd get them to you.
I've read most of Dawkins and hawkings and co.
darsenault 5 years ago