Billy Sunday Evangelism Preacher

[drfoxcourt]

Billy Sunday = a man who not only insists that you respect his unfounded ideas, but insists that you believe it too. THis is a man who should be selling pencils on the sidewalk, not 'educating' the public on morality.

Not one spec of evidence should equal not one spec of respect for the idea.

[GiltEdgeMedia]

I've read about people like Mordecai ham and Billy Sunday but this si teh first time that I've seen real footage.

[FeroGotBalls]

Haha this guy never breathes, religious people always want to follow people with a strong will.

That way they never have to think for them selves or even accept that they're in charge of their own lives.

[spacenie]

Right- religious people never think for themselves. We just believe in old stereotypes like non-religious people do. That shows true thinking.

You think that you're in charge of your own life? That 's a good one. Like when a person gets an unexpected illness? Or terminated from a "secure" job? Or in a traffic accident caused by someone else while "you" obeyed the laws of the road? etc. etc.

[FeroGotBalls]

@spacenie

Old stereotypes, what does that have to do with any of us?

So you are telling me you'd let an imaginary sky daddy be in charge of your life because it's got accidents in it?

But you are right in one thing even if you don't really understand it yourself yet, we aren't fully in charge of our own lives.

I was rather talking about our choices, in those matters you brought up, we had none.

[spacenie]

@FeroGotBalls -

Granted, we probably both agree that people can and do make choices about all kinds of things- here whether or not to believe in God.

God is not imaginary. The universe is not eternal and so must have a cause.

Jesus Christ is God as a human being on earth. He died for our sins on the cross and rose bodily from the grave.

[FeroGotBalls]

@spacenie

"God is not imaginary. The universe is not eternal and so must have a cause."

You have clearly misunderstood something here, sure the universe AS WE KNOW IT is not eternal, it surely had a different form but making assumptions of what was before the big bang is meaningless as there is no evidence yet to build it on.

[spacenie]

@FeroGotBalls

That is not true- scientists are nearly unanimous in saying that the universe is not eternal. Different form doesn't matter, it has not existed forever and, being mere matter, could not have created itself.

[FeroGotBalls]

@spacenie

The universe had a starting point yes, yet you can not claim to know the cause of that beginning and neither can anyone else.

Kind of ironic that you are so skeptic about some things and yet you believe the universe could be wished into existence.

Like I said speculating in what was before the big bang is just speculations, if you find a cause there you are only speculating..

My comment box seems strange, so if there's any obvious errors in this or my next comments you know why.

[spacenie]

YT is not the best at these comment boxes- I hear you.

Speculation? Perhaps, but some speculations are better than others. If the supernatural is fair game for belief, then the idea of a God who has always existed and created the universe out of nothing, apart from Himself, is not unreasonable, nor unscientific.

[FeroGotBalls]

@spacenie

Yeah they should really make some changes.

Sure some speculations are better than others, they just don't prove anything and are nothing to base a belief on.

"then the idea of a God who has always existed and created the universe out of nothing, apart from Himself, is not unreasonable, nor unscientific."

It's an unprovable claim, therefor there is no reason to believe it.

Not for you, not for anyone.

It's both unreasonable and unscientific, it's a dishonest claim.

[spacenie]

@FeroGotBalls

Just because it is unprovable, does not mean that it is unreasonable. Belief in God's creating the universe can be very reasonable and does match up with what modern science says about the universe, that it is finite.

God can not be proven, but there is evidence for His existence. Such evidence are reasons for believing.

Christians believe that the historical life, death and bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ are good reasons for believing in God.

[spacenie]

Saying that belief in God is unscientific- perhaps in a strict sense- but then we're back to a materialistic worldview, which is not scientific and, in my opinion, unreasonable.

Since we cannot see God with scientific instruments, like we would light waves or an atom, then we shouldn't be surprised that science cannot prove God's existence.

Science is great at many things, but since it deals with the material, it cannot prove nor disprove the spiritual.

[FeroGotBalls]

@spacenie

Materialistic is just another way to make the skeptics into "ist's" which makes it sound like we have a claim that we are unable to provide evidence for.

A "materialistic world view" is however possible, your sky daddy creating it out of nothing is not.

If God was real he would be measurable, because in this world force can not exist without matter(vise versa) , and for him to exist in this universe he has to have matter.

If he's outside of our world then he still can't effect it.

[spacenie]

@FeroGotBalls

Sorry for taking so long to get back to you.

God creating the world out of nothing is very possible.

The universe creating itself out of nothing is not.

God may be measurable, but what if we do not have the correct instruments with which to measure Him?

Jesus came and said that He was God in human flesh. His life, death and bodily resurrection give reason to believe in God.

[FeroGotBalls]

@spacenie

"God creating the world out of nothing is very possible."

How is it possible?

"The universe creating itself out of nothing is not."

I've never said it was possible, you did.

"God may be measurable, but what if we do not have the correct instruments with which to measure Him?"

Yeah, maybe someone should invent an instrument that can detect imaginary beings! or wait, thats impossible, bummer.

Last point*

Alright take your head out of the story book, those things are pure fiction.

[spacenie]

@FeroGotBalls

"How is it possible?"- "...the universe was formed at God's command, so that what is seen was not made out of what was visible."

Hebrews 11:3.

The universe creating itself out of nothing is not.

"I've never said it was possible, you did."

Let's see- so the universe can not create itself, yet is not eternal and at the same time was not created by God?

"...those things are pure fiction."

Why? Just because you say so? It doesn't seem that you are looking at the evidence.

[FeroGotBalls]

@spacenie

It is definitely unreasonable to accept something as fact that has no evidence built on it.

The argument that God created the universe is never backed up by evidence, the argument often goes on to reject "materialism" or such thinking that it must either be God who did it all somehow or "simple matter" or such that for no reason made the big bang happen.

You can't prove his existence that way.

If you want to believe because of a storybook thats fine with me, I'm for religious freedom

[spacenie]

@FeroGotBalls

That is not true. There are evidences given for God's existence- Cosmological, Teleological, Ontological, Moral. See for example-

christiancadre (org/topics/cosarg.html)

godandscience (org/apologetics/atheismintro2­.html#7pPm3TfyU8yZ)

reasonablefaith (org/site/News2?page=NewsArtic­le&id=5507)

[FeroGotBalls]

@spacenie

Again you've mistaken evidence for assumptions, you think that dismissing the alternatives with your ignorance you can make your wishful guess the truth?

Even if science was wrong in everything it has ever done and we had no knowledge of anything, it would sill not be a single reason to believe in your imaginary friend, he is nothing more than a name given to the unexplained, that you can't explain due to ignorance and the fact that they are unknown.

[spacenie]

@FeroGotBalls

The evidence for God's existence is stronger than your adjectives describing it.

Yes, there are reasons for God's existence which fall under "God-of-the-gaps," but there is also much positive evidence for believing in His existence and for believing in the existence of the spiritual or immaterial.

If you don't want to believe in God, that is your choice, but you are wrong in dismissing the evidence so flippantly.

[FeroGotBalls]

@spacenie

Please call in to the Atheist Experience with that claim, I'd love to watch that go down. If your position stood up under scrutiny we wouldn't have this discussion.

Look up the atheist experience channel here on youtube for information about it, it's a live TV show.

It's not a choice to believe in God or not, I simply cannot because your claim is unproven and unsupported by the evidence.

Bring me an argument that fits in a 500 letter box, why do you believe?

[spacenie]

@FeroGotBalls

I've given you resources (and there are many others) which give various evidences for believing in God- specifically Christianity. Taken together, they do hold up under OBJECTIVE scrutiny. Are you able to truly investigate Christianity with an open mind?

Yes, my claim is unproven, and it will always will be, because no one can prove that God exists. But I don't need to. God wants people to enter a relationship with Him by FAITH. But this faith does have evidence.

[FeroGotBalls]

@spacenie

You've given me several pages of useless rants and religious nonsense, those are not evidence, they are your personal excuses to believe.

I started as an agnostic, I was open to it going either way, but at some point I realized that if you can't prove your claim; believing it is impossible for an honest person.

I'd say if god was real faith would not be needed, but I'm tolerating your position as you realize that you are in no position to convince anyone.

I enjoyed this talk =)

[spacenie]

@FeroGotBalls

Actually, they (and other similar articles and books) are solid, objective reasons for believing in Gods existence and Christianity in particular.

You say that you are open, but I doubt it. Not to say that if one is truly open, then he or she will always become a Christian. But you say that Jesus resurrection is fiction without saying why and give a similar response to the disciples reaction to His resurrection.

continued....

[spacenie]

At the same time, you can not prove that God doesnt exist and can not prove that materialism is a valid worldview.

reasonablefaith (org/site/News2?page=NewsArtic­le&id=5877)

godandscience (org/evolution/mind-body_duali­sm.html#yfc92hbwRKmL)

godandscience (org/apologetics/beginning.htm­l#2gvXMMPr24Ng)

godandscience (org/apologetics/atheismintro2­.html#IFT61lkEhGmT)

Thanks for the chats!

Continued....

[spacenie]

"At that time the disciples came to Jesus and asked, "Who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven? He called a little child and had him stand among them. And he said: "I tell you the truth, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. Therefore, whoever humbles himself like this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven."

Matthew 18:1-4.

NIV

[FeroGotBalls]

@spacenie

I was only able to read the first link you sent me for some reason, that DR. CRAIG does not know what atheism is or was even remotely close to offering anything that promotes his position, he could simply dodge all the real points making up a false definition of atheism and give that false definition false standpoints.

In the end he was not debating the atheist he was dodging his questions and lying in our faces.

[FeroGotBalls]

@spacenie

Strawman argument, atheism does not claim that God doesn't exist, we claim that you've been unable to convince us that your position(claiming that God exists) is the right position.

Materialism?

Another useless word, we do not claim that matter made the world we dismiss YOUR claim that a "who" or a "god" made the world.

That doesn't give you the right to put a false label on us, make your own claims instead of making up false claims for us.

[spacenie]

@FeroGotBalls

With the universe- how many options do you have? You do not claim that matter made the world, yet you also do not believe that God or a god made it either.

Atheists do claim that God doesn't exist- hence the name.

Sorry if Dr. Craig was not to your liking.

Maybe one of these articles will fare better with you: : )

christiancadre (org/topics/resurrection.html)

christiancadre (org/topics/resurrection.html)

[FeroGotBalls]

@spacenie

I don't claim to know where the universe came from at all, if I did claim to know that; the burden of proof would be on me...

You seam to think that you can claim that god exists because you don't think matter can create the universe.

Keep in mind that we have no reason to believe God or magic exists...

I know the point you are making, but you can't just pick a "feel-good answer" when you don't know how it happened.

[spacenie]

@FeroGotBalls

It's not a "feel-good answer."

It's the one answer that makes the most logical and scientific sense. : )

There are many reasons for believing that the God of Christianity exists. I've listed them before. I can not force you to believe (a contradiction in terms).

[FeroGotBalls]

@spacenie

I don't claim to know where the universe came from, you think you know.

Based on a bronze age goat herder book that has no supportive evidence on it's supernatural claim and can't be proved to be written by anything other than humans.

Yes you cannot force me to believe, if you had anything to offer you wouldn't need to. I don't take it on faith, I take it on reason, logic and evidence, in the end the hard evidence over anything.

Christian sites, erhm what evidence?

[FeroGotBalls]

@spacenie

You are actually wrong about that.

Atheist is the position that we don't believe there is a God.

We don't claim there is none, we just have no reason to believe there is a God.

You claim that God exists and that's your Theist claim, we will reject that claim until it's scientifically proved right.

We don't reject the God we reject the claim, therefor the burden of proof is on you.

So far I've only seen bullshit, your sites included.

[spacenie]

@FeroGotBalls

Then you are agnostic? : )

Whatever, it is a trivial point.

Scientifically proved? That's pretty convenient for you, since we know that science can not prove God, but does give us reasons for beliving in God.

Again, your materialistic worldview is in play. Take off the blinders and open yourself to a reality besides what science can or can not show you.

The burden of proof is on theists? Perhaps, but that doesn't mean that you don't need to defend your worldview either.

[spacenie]

Here's another one for you- : )

garyhabermas (com)

[FeroGotBalls]

@spacenie

How do you know that science can not prove God?

That's a huge claim in itself, and it tells us more about your God than anything, as science can only observe reality.

Exactly! everyone has to be able to prove their claims, if I make a claim I should be able to prove it, otherwise it's dishonest for me to claim it.

Like theists claiming that they know "who" created the universe, a dishonest claim.

[spacenie]

@FeroGotBalls

I disagree that one needs to "prove" their claim. One needs to have reasons for what they hold to be true, certainly. But proof? I wonder if one could always raise the "proof" bar higher and higher when each objection is made.

God wants people to come to Him by faith and to have faith in Him. There are reasons for believing in Christianity, but ultimately one comes to God by faith.

It is honest.

[FeroGotBalls]

@spacenie

You've do clearly not understand the burden of proof, if you cannot prove your claims then you do not know that your claims are true, if you still state them as true then that would be dishonest.

You cannot claim that God exists if you cannot prove it, just like I can not claim that he doesn't exist without having to prove it.

In the end I have no reason to believe he exists when you've been unable to prove your claim, that's my position.

Any questions?

[spacenie]

@FeroGotBalls

We have two belief systems, neither which can be proven. Are you choosing not to believe in God as a starting point?

Since neither belief can be proven, it seems that the next best thing would be to look at the evidence and go where it takes us.

I believe that the evidence for God's existence, and for Christianity in particular, is stronger than the evidence for God not existing.

[FeroGotBalls]

@spacenie

I do not claim that God does not exist, "atheist" is simply the position of being "unconvinced" by theist arguments, atheism is not a belief system...

"Are you choosing not to believe in God as a starting point?"

It's an extreme claim that requires extraordinary evidence, until evidence is found, I cannot believe, and you, should not claim to know.

[spacenie]

@FeroGotBalls

"Extreme?" that's all in the eye of the beholder. To me, it is very believable, and fits with what we know of reality and history better than any other belief or belief system around.

Interesting that you label belief in God as "extreme" and requiring "extraordinary evidence," yet to not believe in God is not extreme and does not require extraordinary evidence.

How convenient. : )

[FeroGotBalls]

@spacenie

I can't believe you think Gods existence isn't an extreme claim, you probably just don't know what you're saying.

You actually claim to know what created the universe, without supporting evidence, and don't think I haven't heard the arguments, they don't suffice.

If I claimed that Santa exists, are you saying that you are burdened to find supportive evidence of his nonexistence?

You've still not understood that burden of proof, it all comes down to the claim and honesty.

PM me?

[spacenie]

@FeroGotBalls

That is not true. There is supporting evidence. If you do not believe it, what can I do? I can't force you, nor anyone else, to believe.

PM on what question?

[FeroGotBalls]

@spacenie

Show me the supporting evidence, that is what you can do.

Plain and simple, can't be that hard to figure out.

I've talked to many believers, none has been able to show supporting evidence for any deity, you'd be the first.

[spacenie]

@FeroGotBalls

Added thought-

"...what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse."

Romans 1:19-20

NIV

[FeroGotBalls]

@spacenie

So in other words he wants blind followers who accept him without them having any reason to do so.

Amazing, the world holds no evidence of his existence yet he punishes those who doesn't believe. I guess your god is a big fan of dishonest blind faith and punishes those who live good lives without the threat of hell.

Are you sure it's not the evil one you are worshiping here?

[FeroGotBalls]

@spacenie

Again, I don't see myself as a materialist, I don't claim to know that matter and energy made everything, I would have to prove that position, that's why Theists invented the word "materialist" so that you could move us to a position were it sounds like we are claiming that the world came out of matter, because we cannot prove it we are not claiming that such is the case, it all comes down to honesty.

Maybe, just maybe, religion doesn't hold all the answers.

[spacenie]

@FeroGotBalls

Paul wrote, "I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God for the salvation of everyone who believes: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile. For in the gospel a righteousness from God is revealed, a righteousness that is by faith from first to last, just as it is written: "The righteous will live by faith." (Romans 1:16-17)

[FeroGotBalls]

@spacenie

So you want to quote storybooks instead of thinking for yourself, just don't expect me to listen to your rant.

How about you define faith for me without looking at some Christian site for the answers, and then think what good will faith ever do to anyone if god does not exist.

I have no problem with people claiming that their belief is faith based, but you've got to admit that your faith is no reason for me to start believing, or anyone else for that matter.

[FeroGotBalls]

@spacenie

You definitely do not know what open minded is if you presume that you can decide other peoples opinions just because you take on their definition.

[FeroGotBalls]

@spacenie

Continues~

There is still no reason to believe something has a supernatural source, and even as such we are far from making the assumption your god or any god for that matter is that cause, if there is such a cause.

So belief is irrational in my opinion and must be based on faith.

Any objections?

[spacenie]

@FeroGotBalls

Sure. Materialism is a world view which cannot be proven (no worldview ultimately can) and has serious defects. Science is a great GUIDE, but a lousy GOD.

Belief in the supernatural can be irrational, sure. But no more irrational than saying that the material is all that exists and to not let yourself be open to the existence of the supernatural (i.e. God).

Christianity is based on faith, but also on the historical- the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

[FeroGotBalls]

@spacenie I don't believe science is a god. "But no more irrational than saying that the material is all that exists and to not let yourself be open to the existence of the supernatural (i.e. God)." who said those things? Because I've never claimed that material is all that exists, I just know that material exists. I'm open to the existence of a god if it would be any supporting evidence of that assumption. Yet there is none. Jesus might have existed, but his "resurrection" is fiction.

[spacenie]

Jesus' resurrection is not fiction. There are many reasons for believing it to be an historical fact.

[FeroGotBalls]

@spacenie

I doubt it, I'd be amazed if you could prove that one.

I'd say there are probably many reasons to believe it, just not a single good one.

I think you misused the word "fact" in that sentence.

No matter how much you believe it if you can't show it you don't know it.

[spacenie]

@FeroGotBalls

Well, I can't show something from almost 2,000 years ago. : ) Granted. But as with any historical event, we look at the evidence and if there is enough good evidence, it does fall into the category of "fact."

"Not a single good one?" Really?

Changed lives of disciples.

Women 1st to meet the risen Christ.

Disciples not anticipating Jesus to rise from the dead.

Body never produced by Romans or Jewish religious leaders.

Disciples dying for something they knew was a lie.

Etc.

[FeroGotBalls]

@spacenie

It was a simple way to put it but it's not wrong.

How can we know if the disciples did or did not anticipate him rising from the dead?

It's probably a work of fiction.

It's a story, no matter what it says you can't rely on it to be valid.

[spacenie]

@FeroGotBalls

That sounds pretty easy.

Why can you not rely on it to be valid?

How do you explain the beginning of Christianity if Jesus did not rise bodily from the dead?

Here are some articles which look at the historicity of Jesus Christ.

christiancadre (org/topics/historicaljesus.ht­ml)

[FeroGotBalls]

@spacenie

Continues~ again

"Jesus Christ is God as a human being on earth. He died for our sins on the cross and rose bodily from the grave."

You are ofcouse free to believe that yet there is a big step from making the assumption of the cause of the universe and to believe a devine being being born out of a virgin and died for our sins and became a zombie and then rose into the sky.

You've abandoned all reason at that point, in my opinion.

[spacenie]

@FeroGotBalls

What makes you think that Jesus became a zombie when He resurrected from the grave. The records show that He was the same person He was before He died.

[FeroGotBalls]

@spacenie

When you say "the records" it makes it sound so much for reliable than the storybook you're actually taking it from.

And you believe that Mary was a virgin aswell?

Isn't it a little bit more probable that she lied than that the laws of nature gave her special treatment?

[LBLlama]

Good Riddance

[FeroGotBalls]

@LBLlama

Haha indeed

[xgsft]

Anyone whom supported prohibition at that time should have been brutally beaten about the skull. It was a total disaster and really gave organized crime a huge hand up from small time to big league.

It was/is a case of the cure is worse than the disease.

[preachthehelloutofya]

We need more preachers like Bro. Billy. Preachers need to get right with God and God can use them. Isaiah 56:10,11 His watchmen are blind:they are all ignorant,they are all dumb dogs,they cannot bark;sleeping,lying down,loving to slumber.Yea they are greedy dogs which can never have enough,and they are shepherds that cannot understand:they all look to their own way,every one for his gain, from his quarter. Come ye say they,I will fetch wine,and we will fill ourselves with strong drink

[oldstock1607]

He was a major leaugue baller.

[arepadetrigo1]

Excellent!!!!!! And everything he said is still true today!!!!!!

[sermonindex]

Old time preaching that cannot be compared with the modern day equivalent!