@Devoti If you bothered to read my other comments, or took a second to look at my channel you would know. Unlike 1GodOnlyOne & dmanpic, I have no problem being honest.
I am an atheist.
Scroll down a bit and read 1GodOnlyOne's "logical argument" for objective morality, then read my responses to it to find out for yourself.
Anyway, I thought it was obvious that I was making fun of these 2 christians by what I wrote.
1. Subjective opinions require authentic conscious access to the thing in question: without conscious access to the thing in question, any opinions formed would necessarily be about some other thing, and not about the thing in question.
You call that logical proof of an objective moral standard?! First of all, nobody knows exactly what "consciousness" is. You can't start a logical argument with an illogical statement. Define "authentic conscious access".
Anyway, lets say I accept your argument. That changes nothing about mine.
Ad homs suit you well. What is "authentic conscious access"? Your argument is pure fail.
Also, I wasn't arguing against objective morality, I was arguing that an objective standard is useless to anyone who doesn't know the objective standard.
So tell me smart guy, what is "authentic conscious access"?
Seriously? That's all you got is: "You are quite stupid"?
Your very first premise falls flat on it's face & I'm quite stupid?! derp derp
@1GodOnlyOne C'mon dude, authentically access your consciousness (lolz) and tell me what you mean.
Oh yea, I forgot that you're a liar. That's all you do is try to deceive people to get them to believe what you do. You & d are doing exactly what I said days ago. You trolls don't care about having an honest conversation, all you want to do is use words to trick people because you know that if you're honest your arguments fail, just like your pathetic little "logical" argument.
@1GodOnlyOne Do you admit that your "logical argument" is a purposeful lie? Do you admit that you are trying to decieve people? You either knew that your first premise was wrong (liar), or you are to simple to understand why it is wrong.
How the fuck can you claim the moral high ground if you use deception as a tool?
Wasn't there a character in the bible who was known as a deceiver?
I have provided airtight logical proof (for the benefit of those with intelligence, not for you), and the fact that you are too stupid to comprehend the proof does not invalidate the proof.
@1GodOnlyOne "I have provided airtight logical proof (for the benefit of those with intelligence, not for you), and the fact that you are too stupid to comprehend the proof does not invalidate the proof."
That is what you said.
You said that you "provided airtight logical proof", but when I PROVED YOU WRONG..you go into hiding like a little bitch.
You better hope that Jesus isn't real, if he is, you are going to suffer,LIAR...
Premise 2: The fact that most people disagree on morality necessitates that most people base their morality on their own subjectivity.
Premise 3: If most people have NO CHOICE but to base their morality on ther own subjectivity, a "objective standard is useless to that individual (most people).
Conclusion: Even if an "objective moral standard" exists, it is unknowable by most human beings, & is therefore useless.
Scientists will only tell us about the mechanics with which the universe works. While a scientist may have understanding in his/her field, philosophy uses logic to interpret the data the right way.
@heyyoulikecoconuts "..Scientist will only tell us about the mechanics with which the universe works"(lol) now i know im talking to an idiot.If not by understanding the mechanics of something one can finally gain true knowledge of it.
"..philosophy uses logic to interpret the data the right way."By definition philosophy,epistemology poses only the questions in ambiguous fashion,hence a(logical/illogical)rethorical context in an attempt to find a solution or search for a reality by examining -->
@godof79 "If not by understanding the mechanics of something one can finally gain true knowledge of it." Not true, If I found a bicycle in the middle of the road and examined it, took it apart, put it back together and rode it, it does nothing to why or how the bike got their.
@heyyoulikecoconuts->How an idea or concept would operate on either side of the ecuation.Regarless what line of logic is being used the method will always be intuitive,not the basis(nor the"right way"as u put it) for a definitive assesment.The main flaw that cripples philosophy is precisely its own semantic nature(open to free interpretation).What legitimacy then lies therein?under what substanciated objective premise can philosophy bestow truth upon ideas/concepts for which there are no proof->
@godof79 "The main flaw that cripples philosophy is precisely its own semantic nature(open to free interpretation)" Are all scientists m-theorists? Are all scientists big bang cosmologists? Do all scientists believe in an absolute beginning? Do all scientists agree on one scientific truth? Scientific data is prone to interpretation too. Most of these interpretations are based on philosophical presuppositions.
@heyyoulikecoconuts ->or evidence nor does bother to provide such a material,instead all it can offers is a mere thesis of interpretetions,and this according to you is the right way?most effective than a thorough scientific scrutiny?are u fuckin kidding me? How can that approach even compare to that of Science wherefore its logic is expressed through precise mathematical algorithms.A method used to assess/re-assess/validate/invalidate/upgrade/develop different/new applications a/o concepts,all->
philosophy of ethics, etc. at the university level. It's so people like Lawrence Krauss or Stephen Hawking can be critiqued when they tell a university audience that the universe came from absolutely nothing, when actual nothingness causes nothing.
@heyyoulikecoconuts->of which,may offer the possibility of being study or re-enact under virtual scenarios before experienced in real practice.- I think you're just too coconutty.
@godof79 Philosophers have claimed the universe had a beginning long before science. So through your empty rhetoric I was able to see that you have a shallow view of philosophy and a bloated view of science. I believe the two disciplines mixed together yields the best results.
In the end time will tell. I am not worried about anything. What do you lose by believing in Jesus? My question is if you died tonight do you know where you will be going? We all have souls. Choose whom you will live for today? because in the end there is a heaven or hell waiting. In the end there is no excuses and you cannot escape from God. Mocking God don't think God does not stand by His Word. He is true and remembers.Truly if you sincerely want to learn about salvation and Jesus just ask.
Christians live through Faith in God where science cannot explain. Believe it or not atheist have to have faith in hoping that a deity does not exist(God). The very fact that we exist there has to be a creator. We could not just evolve. The fact is that there has to be an absolute. If everything is relative then their is no solution for anything. There is a absolute right, wrong, beginning and end. If there is no absolute right or wrong then everything is acceptable. God is absolute truth.
@jusmusjc494 Nope, wrong again. A lack of belief in something based on lack of evidence does not fall under the definition of "faith". "The very fact that we exist there has to be a creator". Not logically sound, you are jumping to conclusions and making fallacy from ignorance, and false dilemma fallacy.
@jusmusjc494 "The fact is that there has to be an absolute". With regards to what? You are making word games. The entire reality exists of both absolutes and relatives. "We could not just evolve". Mind backing that up? "There is a absolute right, wrong". False, morality is subjective, as shown by world history and different cultures. "...beginning and end". Proof? "then everything is acceptable". According to who's standard?
Okay, so there's a cosmic Jewish vampire who was his own father and can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because some rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree... yep, Christianity makes sense.
@moldrad Turn to Jesus for the forgiveness of your sins. You are heaping up wrath for yourself on the Day of Judgment. Call it nonsense but at the end of the day, you will stand before God on that day all by yourself with no excuse. Its not wise to mock your Creator.
@dmanpic WOW you just hit on the main reason I'm a lapsed Christian! Any person who demanded that I love them or they will have you tortured FOREVER! Your scare tactics won't work on me because I'm an Erisian. Blessed Beets (not beats!) BTW I asked Yashua Ben Merriam or Har Nazar a long-haired radical socialist Reform Rabbi (AKA Jesus) to guide me and he put me to test the faith of you folks
@dmanpic You don't seem to be paying attention. No- the only thing we have (potentially) established is that I have a *different* understanding of this god than you do. Your statement "You definitely have a misunderstanding of the God of the Bible." is a perfect demonstration of the danger inherent within Christianity for precisely this reason. You have, as I pointed out numerous times, done absolutely nothing to justify your claim that your specific "understanding" is [cont]
@LeonhardEuler1 [cont] correct- you simply assert it and tell others that they are "definitely" wrong. That is exactly the mindset of the monsters who perpetrated atrocities like the crusades.
@LeonhardEuler1 I stand by my statement. You have no idea who this God is. You mock what you don't understand and blaspheme what your maker. Thats not a good position to be in.
@dmanpic Of course not- it is a creation of your imagination and desires and I am not privy to the inner-workings of your mind. You are the only one who will understand, fully, your conception of god. But that is But that is irrelevant- you still completely missed the point. If you feel like you understand god (hardly humble, I should point out) then whatever- go ahead. Why should anyone believe you that your god concept is correct? [cont]
@LeonhardEuler1 [cont] And please don't insult me with your petty threats. The position I am in is being a good person, as well as being honest with myself and asking honest questions of a being which supposedly wants my eternal praise and adoration. If that is a bad thing in this being's eyes, then it can go fuck itself- I am better than any being which denounces honest inquiry.
@LeonhardEuler1 Pleaseee reconsider. If you were in the middle of the street and there was a car coming and you didnt see it and I saw it and didn't say anything, I would be evil on that account. Well the situation is alot graver. I am pleading with you to get out of the proverbial street of God's wrath. Jesus is the only way to salvation.
@dmanpic Look, I understand where you're coming from, and I have no problem with you attempting to save me from the metaphorical car (especially since this is your video, and you are responding to my comment- not coming to me and pestering me when I've shown no interest, or attempting to enact laws to force me to believe as you do, etc.)- I get it. My point is.... let me try to elucidate my point with a question. What if I came on here and told you that [cont]
@LeonhardEuler1 the bible was a Satanic lie, designed to lure people away from god, and that the only way to salvation was to reject Jesus (which would be, in this scenario, rejecting Satan)- how seriously would you take my pleads? Does it matter that I am sincerely attempting to get you out of the proverbial street of god's wrath? Or would you require something to substantiate my claims? You see- without that justification, your pleads simply fall on deaf ears. And [cont]
@LeonhardEuler1 [cont] , in my opinion, that is how it should be- reserve belief until sufficient justification has been presented. Also, as I said before, I fail to see how this is an insult to a perfect and omnibenevolent being- if it has a problem with my epistemology and my conduct (or feels that the former out-weighs the latter), then I am not interested in that being- I don't want its "salvation."
@LeonhardEuler1 I got you man. Things are easier if God doesn't exist though right? You get to live how you want to live and not be restricted by a transcendent moral code that demands sinners will pay for the sins we commit. The world is marked by sin, death, and vain pursuits. We need a Savior. Jesus is justification alone that He is the only Savior.
@dmanpic No, I think it is quite the opposite. I think people who make this statement tend to be missing the fact that living in a universe without a god does not mean we are living in one without each other. We absolutely cannot live how we want. Not being restricted by a transcendent moral code is very different from not being restricted at all. Personally, I think it is tremendously more difficult to [cont]
@LeonhardEuler1 [cont] contemplate the deep and complicated moral questions we face than it is to simply say "this book (or my preacher, etc.) says this is the right choice. Done. No thought or effort required." Granted, that may be a bit of a simplification, but I think it suffices to say that I the true difficulty lies in the aforementioned contemplation, in recognizing ones own ability to affect those around themselves, [cont]
@LeonhardEuler1 [cont] and in understanding and enduring the consequences of those actions. The world may be marked by evil, but, personally, I see that as more of a problem for your own worldview containing an omnibenevolent god than as necessitating a savior for humanity.
@LeonhardEuler1 Hmmmm I wonder why "recognizing ones own ability to affect those around themselves and in understanding and enduring the consequences of those actions." works so efficiently?? Secular humanists esteems man too highly. We naturally love playing god and taking all the credit for every good thing that happens. But if something disastrous or catastrophic happens, agnostics/atheists are the first to show their irate hatred at God who they believe doesn't exist anyway. Contradiction.
Craig didn't even answer the question What the student asked was even if there is a god and there is obj morality,how do we know what they are?cuz like craig said, what us humans say is moral or immoral is purely based on sociological factors of each culture.So how do we know that the Nazis were truly evil? only person that can tell us is god accding to craig.But problem with that is the Nazis and other evils thought they had god on their side so its simply 1 culture against another.
That just demonstrates your god's immorality. If your god exists, he set up a system where we only know a tiny bit of what is objectively moral, but we are considered guilty of the things that we cannot possibly know are immoral
If this objective standard exists, obviously your god isn't immoral because he is the author of morality, but he is still subjectively immoral by any human standard.
Any human would be considered immoral by our subjective standard for doing what you think your god did.
@Zentz29 I'm not a coward. The truth is you know enough to realize you need forgiveness for your sins against God. Call it subjectivity or objectivity or whatever, you sinned against a perfect, Holy, righteous God. You need a Savior just like me. Please humble yourself and realize your inability to save yourself or work off your sin debt. Jesus lived a perfect life, fulfilling all of God's commands. He suffered, died, and rose so that wicked sinners can be forgiven and reconciled to God.
@dmanpic No, the truth is not that i know I need forgivness. That's the problem with you christians & muslims. You just can't accept the obvious fact that there are people who don't think the way you do.
I guess there is some truth to that. I do need forgiveness from PEOPLE when I do something wrong, but I don't need it from your imaginary friend.
You're not seeking truth, you're trying to defend a preconcieved belief. You don't understand the difference because you are delusional.
@Zentz29 Imaginary friend. That never gets old. I'm not just trying to help you, I'm trying to point you to eternal life. Why wouldn't you want to be forgiven by God? And Muslims and Christians are not remotely the same. We are on opposite ends. Christians are saved by grace alone not by works. But its all the same to you right?
You are a moron. William Lane Craig himself said that if you cannot discredit the premises of an argument, you should accept it.
You are a fucking LIAR & a COWRD...Fuck you.
We're done.
I have basically proved to you that you are wrong, but you reject what I say. Even William Lance Craig would be disgusted by your ignorance. You are a deluded fucking waste of life...Fuck you...
Anyway, an "objective standard" would include every possible action any human being could possibly take.
We know for a fact that driving cars is bad for the environment. Is it immoral to drive a car? If there is an objective standard there is an unquestionable answer to that.
The things we collectively/personally agree on are not even the tip of the iceburg. So ok, if what you say is true, most of our morals are subjective.
Greatest question? Don't know how you drew that conclusion. Craig is great at saying a lot, without actually saying anything. I remember doing this when I was at university. I'd leave writing some essays until the very last minute. My only option was to saturate page after page with unnecessary technical and scientific language in an attempt to obfuscate my lack of knowledge. The vast majority of the time, my lecturers saw right through me. Well, Dr. William Craig, I see right through you.
@urprivacypolicysucks Greatest question because the kid appeared morally responsible for sinning against God. He had a heart felt concern for His own soul. Its a question and concern we all should be faced with and realize the only hope in found in Jesus Christ.
@dmanpic I don't want to get in to a discussion about whether god exists, so all I'll say is, this kind of guilt this kid is suffering is, aside from the wars and infringement of civil rights, one of the main reasons I hate religion.
@dmanpic It's not really an "option" as such. You can't just suddenly choose to believe or not believe in god. Either you believe because that's what you've been taught, or you use critical thinking skills to decide you can't believe based on the complete lack of evidence. It's better than religion because atheism doesn't drill guilt and fear in to people. No wars will ever start in the name of atheism. No planes will be flown in to buildings in the name of atheism. I have plenty more examples.
@urprivacypolicysucks Ummm Josef Stalin, Pol Pot, Mao Zedong, Hitler (please don't say he's christian). Bottom line, the problem is not religion but its mankind. Our sin drives us to do the incomprehensible. We all need Jesus for the forgiveness of our sins.
@dmanpic Wrong again Buck'o. None of which you mentioned started war BECAUSE of atheism. Atheism has never been an underlying reason for war, unlike religion. As a matter of fact, ironically enough, those same people rose to power due to the same reasons why religion is bad. Dogma, religiosity, worship of a figure and lack of independent thinking skills. Good try though. why wouldn't we say Hitler was Christian, when history show that he was?
@BillHicks420 There will always be counterfeits and Hitler was one. You know a counterfeit by measuring it up against the real thing: Jesus Christ. Okay so tell me why I should be atheist?
@dmanpic Sure, just ignore all my response and points. Sure, I'll play that game. What do you mean Hitler was a "counterfeit"? "Should"? You can be whatever the fuck you want, I don't care either way. The reason I'm an atheist is because there are equal claims of 1000's of Gods, religions and doctrines, all claiming to be right, and all with equal amount of "evidence". There simply exists no evidence for a God, especially a god with given attributes like the one you believe in.
@dmanpic That's too bad, just because you say, "don't say Hitler was a christian", doesn't make it untrue. From Mein Kampf: "Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord.". There are LOTS of other quotes, just look at the wikipage on "Adolf Hitler's religious views". The other tyrants you mentioned didn't oppress/kill people in the name of atheism, if so, show me evidence.
@dmanpic You should watch the series "Why I am no longer a Christian" by user Evid3nc3. It's an excellent series (playlist on his channel). It's relatively long, it gets pretty deep at times and I don't think it has been completed yet, but if you care at all whether you beliefs are true or not, you should try at least to see it from an ex-devout christian point of view. What have you got to loose?
@urprivacypolicysucks Your right. I would have nothing to lose. So you don't believe in evil?? Please elaborate. I haven't heard that one in a while. I'm intrigued by the way you view this broken fallen world.
@dmanpic The words "good" and "evil" are abstract human constructs. The universe is indifferent to "good" and "evil". People who do bad things (by their society's standards) are only bad subjectively. What I'm trying to say is all morals are subjective. I don't know what you think on the matter, but many religious people would think gay people deserve to go to hell, while most secular people would think that opinion is "evil". The world is not "broken" or "fallen" - people are just being people.
@urprivacypolicysucks Your absolutely right. People are just being people. I say that there is something fundamentally wrong with people, me included. Subjectivity kills the intellectual mind. Lets think about it. If morality depends solely on societal norms, how does a country like U.S. justify itself in interfering in the affairs of the Nazis? That was their society correct? Could it not point to a universal thread that humanity is bonded by in which an inherent moral code is embedded in us.
@dmanpic That's right, there are common moral threads, but they depend on era and culture. Morality has evolved and continues to evolve. Compared to a few centuries ago, global moral values have changed radically. Not long ago, it wasn't considered immoral to own slaves, now it is. Some people think it's immoral to be homosexual, most do not. Some countries think capital punishment is immoral, others do not. Some countries don't let women vote, most do. Where's the objective morality?
@dmanpic Most morals are taught, some are somewhat inherent, but only by our evolution. What do you think would happen to a species who thought it was a good idea to kill every other member of its own species, including their offspring?
Christians: please stop saying your morals are objective, it is not. What you think is right or wrong from your Bible is merely your own view, your own interpretation. Many of us (including other sects of Christians btw) don't agree with this, and this makes your morals essentially subjective, same as ours. All morals are subjective. How we cope with this diversity of opinion to make a functional society is a different issue.
@Casshyr Morals do look subjective but understand if they are there can't be anything "right" or "wrong". Which means 9/11, the holocaust, slavery, etc. are all just the person's opinion that that particular activity was wrong and not flat out evil. There is a huge difference and huge consequences to that view.
@dmanpic it's not just a view, it is the truth. Even if there is indeed a set of rules that mankind should follow, our society is too heterogenous for this to be applied globally. So this essentially means morals will always be subjective, as long as multiple viewpoints exist within our society.
And fyi, majority of Christians thought slavery was a good thing, and they justified it with the Bible. Our concepts of morals change over time. It's called social evolution.
@Casshyr Yes. As an African-American I am well aware of that fact. Here's the thing, human beings are sinful wicked people who are selfish by nature. Just look at society. It is possible for people to twist Scripture for their own evil means. All I know is that Jesus Christ is a forgiver of the worst of sinners. That includes slave owners, murderers, rapists, liars, thieves, adulterers, drunkards, and any in between. His love cannot be denied.
@dmanpic Yes, i agree that is your interpretation. But for the sake of peace and maintaining order to society, i would suggest you keep that view to yourself rather than going about trying to convince others why your interpretation of the Bible is correct and all others are wrong. In the end, i believe in the principle of "keep your religion private". We have at least 200+ religions right now in this world. Imagine if all of them start preaching actively like Christianity...chaos!
@dmanpic Yes, individuals and groups of individuals define what's right and wrong. There were many muslims who thought 9/11 was right. Many Nazis thought the holocaust was right. They didn't think it was evil. Many, if not most, christians and muslims think homosexuality is 'immoral' - well, the rest of us think this kind of thinking is wrong (some would say "evil") - it's all subjective and you know it.
@urprivacypolicysucks if its subjective then there is no reason to say what they did is evil because our morals mean nothing they are just artificial rules placed on us by society for the better interest of the public.
I disagree, these acts you mention are simply universally wrong many Nazi's wrote about how they knew these things were wrong. The golden rule is universal and known by empathy a trait everyone has to some degree. If its in our DNA as you suggest that would support a designer.
Oh, & by the way, if you did mean "conscience" instead of "conscious". I appreciate that you're refuting your own arguments for me, but I'm doing just fine dubunking your claims on my own.
I don't wish for a world without god, because thats what I already live in. A world without religion will suffice . . .
I'm convinced there is no god, never was. None can prove his existence...I now can say I'm spiritually and mentally 100% free to evolve as an induvidual...and GOD it feels great..
Religion is a delusion cooked up in the stone age time of profound ignorance.
There'd be no need for faith if there were evidence,would there?
The reason I don't believe in an objective standard is because I don't believe in a creator. I can't see a possible way that such a standard could exist without some form intelligent creator.
Don't get me wrong, if someone can explain how that standard could exist without a creator, I'm open to it.
I'm also open to a possible creator. I just havn't been convinced yet.
As far as any known religions, I'm still open to it, but I would not worship a god who acts like a human.
@Zentz29 Jesus did not act like a human. He was fully human and fully God. Yes its hard to believe because no one was ever like that which makes Jesus all the more unique. He is the only answer for this world because He is the only one who paid the penalty for our sins. There's a a WHOLE lot more to Jesus but He came into the world to save sinners. His personhood is unrivaled by any other figure in history.
Well, I've made my case that morality is subjective (at least for most people) & neither you or anyone else can refute it. Can you at least admit it?
I wonder why it is that christians always tend to start ignoring me when we get to the same point I got to with you.
Morality for humans is subjective wether an objective standard exists, period. Not only that, but the objective is absolutly to anyone who doesn't know it.
P.S. I don't really wonder why christians ignore when we get to this point...
Morality for humans is subjective wether an objective standard exists *or not*, period. Not only that, but the objective *standard* is absolutly to anyone *useless* to anyone who doesn't know it.
I'm surprised that his best argument is the Cosmological Argument. That's purely a perspective based argument, and anyone who isn't a theist isn't going to find that convincing.
Thanks for posting BTW! I attempted a similar post on 'One of the Silliest Follow-Up Questions Ever!' and thus far it has been vetoed. I guess the moderator there only wants to hear one side of the argument!
Pursuing the genocide theme I found Deuteronomy[7:2-6 & 20:16,17]. Not wishing to misinterpret anything, I sought clarification from the footnotes to these verses in my NIV. Having read these, I half expected to see the initials A.H. appended. I couldn’t imagine even he could express the sentiment therein any more succinctly! Now I never thought of myself as a moral relativist but if this is where moral absolutes lead I’ll stick with my instincts – at least I know genocide is evil!
@NUAGESA "There is a way that seems right to a man but the end thereof is destruction" Proverbs 12. Your instincts can lead you in the wrong direction. Seek Christ. There is not one flaw in Him that you can point out.
Is WLC considered intelligent in the USA? If so I sincerely feel sorry for your children. How or why would anyone with more than 4 brain cells want to listen to that man? He hasn't a notion what he's talking about himself! LOL. People need to start thinking for themselves!
Religious people conveniently don't grasp the concept of morality and how it has evolved over the last 2000 years. There are no morals in nature unless we humans agree they're somewhat useful for the common good. Morals = the rule of law
@ptij0404 "Religious people conveniently don't grasp the concept of morality and how it has evolved over the last 2000 years." Nope - you are one who does not understand that turture little children is wrong inspite of any direction evolution may take.
@stonewall1888 Your mixing apples and oranges. We're discussing morality not incidental occurrences. Why do children need to be taught to share, tell the truth, respect their moms and dads. Its because we're prone to be selfish, lie and disrespect them. We have a sin nature that necessitates God's intervention to save us. The situation is graver than we think. That is why we need Jesus.
@dmanpic Rubbish, morality also comes into play with survival mode, Good and bad is what it is. Another example if a child plays with a lighter, starts a fire and kills his family in the home. So your argument of GOD inherintly placing good and bad is thrown out. A child is yet to be educated in all things and its the parents who guide him or her into what morality is, which is in another word "being resposiblile with your actions"
@dmanpic Actually you have no clue on child behaviour or human bahaviour, Studies on child behaviour in regards to sharing, lying, being selfish, giving love is all down to again survival. It is these virtues that make us stronger....not weaker. Please feel free to look it up before commenting back. Also if you feel children or your own are so selfish...why have you not killed them yet, your bible permits such slaughter. Of course you will cherry pick like most christains do.
@stonewall1888 Clearly the brain has to develop so when someone becomes of age to make moral choices then their are awaken to their conscious inside of them. You need Jesus my friend. Plain and simple. Read about Him, know Him, surrender to Him. You cant lose if you do. You lose everything if you don't.
@dmanpic OH DEAR. I guess you need some comfort in your life. What do you want me to read in the bible?? I have said it once and will continue to do so - CHRISTIANS SUCH AS YOURSELF ONLY CHERRY PICK THE BIBLE, YOU DO NOT NOR WILL NOT FOLLOW ALL GODS COMMANDS, AS TO DO SO WOULD SHOW HOW SUCH THINKING IS BARBARIC, EVIL AND AGAINST ALL HUMAN MORALS THAT ARE TAUGHT AND ALSO KNOWN WITH OUT TEACHING.
So please if all you have is what you said then you have not said anything of value.
@stonewall1888 I can explain to you every verse you think is barbaric but I doubt that will change your mind. Your heart needs to be changed and only Jesus can do that. His offer of salvation is open.
@dmanpic “And the LORD struck the child that Uriah’s wife bore to David, and it became ill… Then on the seventh day it came to pass that the child died.” (2 Sam 12:15,18)
I dont know about you but the general thing about being ill is you suffer, now please dont be a hypocrite and also learn your bible before coming back with such a stupid comment. Hypocrite...yes you are.
@stonewall1888 "The preaching of the cross is foolishness to those that perish"-1 Corinthians 1:18. Here's a life-saving tip for you. Man up, own up to your sin, humble yourself, and seek Christ for forgiveness. For your own sake please look into it. Its that serious.
@dmanpic You are a bit of a fool mate...honestly if you think the bible is soley based on christian belief and only came about after jesus (oh yeah almost 300 years after his death) then YOU are a hypocrite, you fail yourself as you do not know how to do any research or perhaps you can but the thought fills you with dread and so the "stick my fingers in my ears and go la la la la la" syndrome stays and you dont have to think for your self. I fear you lack in study in debates
@stonewall1888 I took a class at a public university about this stuff. I'm not going to argue with you about KNOWN facts about the dates of the gospels. I refuse to engage in ignorant debates that is common knowledge.
@dmanpic You are not going to ARGUE?????? Well I was looking to debate but seeing as you have went to university and studied STUFF then I will back down, after all having a PHD in stuff is an athiest worst nightmare to debate. Besides known facts are useless against STUFF. Can you leave a list of where I can read STUFF...It sounds AWSOME.
@dmanpic You can "lose if you ['surrender to Him']." You lose your integrity as a conscious, conscientious human being when you reject the faculties that allow you determine between fantasy and reality, how you would like things to be and how things really are.
Without Jesus, "the world can live as one," to quote Lennon, and work to improve our condition, instead of accepting divine authority.
@Ematched Spoken like a true secular humanist who believe man is the supreme being. Your not the one on the throne, God is. He makes the rules and for some odd reason He sent His Son to save sinners like you and me from the penalty and power of our sins. The love of God is beyond understanding, yet real.
@dmanpic Wonderful assertions. However, none of them have yet to be proven true.
You spin a fine web of delusions: "His Son" "sinners" "sins" "beyond understanding." You might as well speak about "nothing" being "beyond understanding." That might actually prove useful, unlike your mindless blathering about your celestial daddy.
Craig likes to argue that objective morality exists, but he never wants to discuss specifics. Why? Because then he'd have to admit that no one, not even Christians, can agree on what these moreal values are. If we can't figure out what this Objective values are, then how can we be certain they exist in the first place?
@Springheel01 On the contrary, Christians believe that the conscious gives light to the moral standards that we are held by. You believe (hopefully) that murdering, stealing, lying, etc. are wrong. The Bible says its not by accident to why you believe that. Its not society that instills those truths inside of us but God Almighty. It is to lead us to cross of Christ.
@Murdulo How would you be able to feel an unknowable God? Why would anyone think that, assuming that that is what Christians believe, which it isn't? People meet God in his Son and the testimony about him recorded by the people there. You can deny the truthfulness of such a testimony but don't give me this nonsense that I believe in God only because I "feel it". Straw man argument friend.
@Murdulo Your first premise is off by a long shot. Feelings are not a necessary condition for God's existence. God exist necessarily. He created us in His image and we deny His existence because we love our sin and hate God. Our hearts our evil. We want to be the gods of our own lives. Christ came to save us from not only God's wrath, but also our wicked selves. His gift is wide open for anyone to receive it.
@BillHicks420 It means that His existence is does not depend on our feelings but our existence depends on His existence. No God, no life. How does that sound?
@dmanpic No god, no life is yet another claim without any truth value. For example, I could make the same claim, but substitute Allah or Odin. "Our existence depends on his existence" is also another claim without anything to back it up.
@BillHicks420 What do you think about this quote about atheism? “The belief that there was nothing and nothing happened to nothing and then nothing magically exploded for no reason, creating everything and then a bunch of everything magically rearranged itself for no reason whatsoever into self-replicating bits which then turned into dinosaurs. Makes perfect sense.” The laws of Thermodynamics necessitate a Creator.
@dmanpic Strawman fallacy. Atheism is merely the lack of belief in a deity. Please elaborate on how the laws of Thermodynamics necessitate a creator? And while you're at it, why this God is your god in particular, and not the 100's of other creator gods?
@BillHicks420 Absolutely. First off, the first law of thermodynamics says that energy is neither created nor destroyed and that it is conserved and is capable of being converting to different forms of energy. If energy is not created, then how did our existence come to be, without an external factor playing a role? The 2nd law states that the amount of useable energy is decreasing as time progresses and the amount of chaos is increasing. It points to a starting point in the universe.
@dmanpic Yes, the universe is in equilibrium. It is a zero-sum game when it comes to energy. You also forget to mention that it is about an ISOLATED, or closed system. Furthermore, we don't know the bounds of the universe, and so we don't know as it qualifies as a thermodynamic system. Where do you get that "chaos is increasing" and "amt. of usable energy" decreases? usable energy decreases WITHIN a system as energy transfer happens.
@BillHicks420 The 2nd law points to a beginning point in which the amount of useable energy was a a certain finite level. For something to have a beginning, there must be an instigator present. The reason the God of the Bible is that God is because creation shows that God is immanent and cares deeply about mankind. He sent His Son Jesus to Earth to pay the penalty for guilty sinners who deserved His righteous judgment. No other person paid my sin debt. Jesus revealed this God.
@dmanpic The second law certainly do not point to such an event. Like I said, we don¨t know the thermodynamic qualities of the universe as one system, because we do not know its bounds. "For something to have a beginning, there must be an instigator present." Fallacy from ignorance. You are simply asserting this, without knowing. You are assuming that the universe had a beginning. We simply don't know. But in any case, you are jumping to the conclusion that this is instigator is YOUR deity.
@BillHicks420 Umm your a little late with scientific research because it has been proven that our universe CANNOT be eternal. The second law alludes to that so clearly. Yes I jumped to a conclusion that it is the God of the Bible. But it makes a ton more sense than anything else.
i don't think the guy who tries to get you to kill your son for a bet is the guy who's moral values i would follow...
Devoti 1 day ago
@Devoti Hey!
How did you get in here? Do you have an authentic conscious access card!? You can't be here without an authentic conscious access card!
I'm totally super serial! authentic conscious access cards are REAL because you can say things into existance if you're a christian.
Don't believe me? Just ask 1GodOnlyOne, and my main man d here.
=p
Zentz29 1 day ago
@Zentz29 ohoho... is this a christian joke or an atheist pretending to be christian?
Devoti 1 day ago
@Devoti If you bothered to read my other comments, or took a second to look at my channel you would know. Unlike 1GodOnlyOne & dmanpic, I have no problem being honest.
I am an atheist.
Scroll down a bit and read 1GodOnlyOne's "logical argument" for objective morality, then read my responses to it to find out for yourself.
Anyway, I thought it was obvious that I was making fun of these 2 christians by what I wrote.
Zentz29 1 day ago
@Zentz29 lol, yeah, you know. one can never be too sure when it comes to theists... the border between joke, troll and legit can be diffuse at best.
Devoti 1 day ago
@Devoti True.
Poe's law. It's sad that christian fundies can't be distinguished from people who are mocking their ignorance.
I'm not convinced that 1GodOnlyOne is actually a christian. What he said is stupid to the point that it might be mocking christianity.
In any case, he's a liar. Wether an atheist liar, or a christian liar...i don't know.
Zentz29 1 day ago
Every time the atheist asserts that subjective moral ideals exist, he proves (unwittingly) that objective moral ideals also exist. Here is the proof:
1GodOnlyOne 3 days ago
1. Subjective opinions require authentic conscious access to the thing in question: without conscious access to the thing in question, any opinions formed would necessarily be about some other thing, and not about the thing in question.
2. Authentic conscious access requires non-fabricated data.
3. Non-fabricated data require objective existence.
1GodOnlyOne 3 days ago
4. Subjective opinions about moral ideals exist.
5. Therefore, authentic conscious access to moral ideals exists.
6. Therefore, non-fabricated data about moral ideals exist.
7. Therefore, moral ideals exist objectively.
1GodOnlyOne 3 days ago
@1GodOnlyOne "authentic conscious access"?
lolz
You call that logical proof of an objective moral standard?! First of all, nobody knows exactly what "consciousness" is. You can't start a logical argument with an illogical statement. Define "authentic conscious access".
Anyway, lets say I accept your argument. That changes nothing about mine.
Zentz29 3 days ago
@Zentz29 You are quite stupid.
1GodOnlyOne 3 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@1GodOnlyOne Explain it to me then wise one.
Ad homs suit you well. What is "authentic conscious access"? Your argument is pure fail.
Also, I wasn't arguing against objective morality, I was arguing that an objective standard is useless to anyone who doesn't know the objective standard.
So tell me smart guy, what is "authentic conscious access"?
Seriously? That's all you got is: "You are quite stupid"?
Your very first premise falls flat on it's face & I'm quite stupid?! derp derp
Zentz29 3 days ago
@1GodOnlyOne Awwwww...
I took my dogs for a walk hoping that I'd see a response from you when I got back...
Maybe I need an authentic conscious access card to view your comments?
=o)
Zentz29 3 days ago
@Zentz29 penis
frylock492 2 days ago
@frylock492 Subjectivity.
Zentz29 2 days ago
@1GodOnlyOne C'mon dude, authentically access your consciousness (lolz) and tell me what you mean.
Oh yea, I forgot that you're a liar. That's all you do is try to deceive people to get them to believe what you do. You & d are doing exactly what I said days ago. You trolls don't care about having an honest conversation, all you want to do is use words to trick people because you know that if you're honest your arguments fail, just like your pathetic little "logical" argument.
Zentz29 2 days ago
@1GodOnlyOne Do you admit that your "logical argument" is a purposeful lie? Do you admit that you are trying to decieve people? You either knew that your first premise was wrong (liar), or you are to simple to understand why it is wrong.
How the fuck can you claim the moral high ground if you use deception as a tool?
Wasn't there a character in the bible who was known as a deceiver?
Zentz29 1 day ago
If the "objective standard" is fact, demonstrate to me that it is.
How does the fact that I say morality is subjective prove that there is an objective standard.
Again, you're just saying stuff. You cannot say things into existance.
Zentz29 3 days ago
Comment removed
1GodOnlyOne 3 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Zentz29 You cannot say things out of existence.
I have provided airtight logical proof (for the benefit of those with intelligence, not for you), and the fact that you are too stupid to comprehend the proof does not invalidate the proof.
1GodOnlyOne 3 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@1GodOnlyOne "I have provided airtight logical proof (for the benefit of those with intelligence, not for you), and the fact that you are too stupid to comprehend the proof does not invalidate the proof."
That is what you said.
You said that you "provided airtight logical proof", but when I PROVED YOU WRONG..you go into hiding like a little bitch.
You better hope that Jesus isn't real, if he is, you are going to suffer,LIAR...
Zentz29 22 hours ago
C'mon d...
I made this easy for you and only used three premises. After reading it again I found that I even made a mistake in the conclusion.
Zentz29 3 days ago
Explain...
Zentz29 4 days ago
Premise 1: Most people disagree on what is moral.
Premise 2: The fact that most people disagree on morality necessitates that most people base their morality on their own subjectivity.
Premise 3: If most people have NO CHOICE but to base their morality on ther own subjectivity, a "objective standard is useless to that individual (most people).
Conclusion: Even if an "objective moral standard" exists, it is unknowable by most human beings, & is therefore useless.
Zentz29 4 days ago
Scientists will only tell us about the mechanics with which the universe works. While a scientist may have understanding in his/her field, philosophy uses logic to interpret the data the right way.
heyyoulikecoconuts 6 days ago
@heyyoulikecoconuts "..Scientist will only tell us about the mechanics with which the universe works"(lol) now i know im talking to an idiot.If not by understanding the mechanics of something one can finally gain true knowledge of it.
"..philosophy uses logic to interpret the data the right way."By definition philosophy,epistemology poses only the questions in ambiguous fashion,hence a(logical/illogical)rethorical context in an attempt to find a solution or search for a reality by examining -->
godof79 4 days ago
@godof79 "If not by understanding the mechanics of something one can finally gain true knowledge of it." Not true, If I found a bicycle in the middle of the road and examined it, took it apart, put it back together and rode it, it does nothing to why or how the bike got their.
heyyoulikecoconuts 4 days ago
@heyyoulikecoconuts->How an idea or concept would operate on either side of the ecuation.Regarless what line of logic is being used the method will always be intuitive,not the basis(nor the"right way"as u put it) for a definitive assesment.The main flaw that cripples philosophy is precisely its own semantic nature(open to free interpretation).What legitimacy then lies therein?under what substanciated objective premise can philosophy bestow truth upon ideas/concepts for which there are no proof->
godof79 4 days ago
@godof79 "The main flaw that cripples philosophy is precisely its own semantic nature(open to free interpretation)" Are all scientists m-theorists? Are all scientists big bang cosmologists? Do all scientists believe in an absolute beginning? Do all scientists agree on one scientific truth? Scientific data is prone to interpretation too. Most of these interpretations are based on philosophical presuppositions.
heyyoulikecoconuts 4 days ago
@heyyoulikecoconuts ->or evidence nor does bother to provide such a material,instead all it can offers is a mere thesis of interpretetions,and this according to you is the right way?most effective than a thorough scientific scrutiny?are u fuckin kidding me? How can that approach even compare to that of Science wherefore its logic is expressed through precise mathematical algorithms.A method used to assess/re-assess/validate/invalidate/upgrade/develop different/new applications a/o concepts,all->
godof79 4 days ago
@godof79 There is a reason why there are fields
such as: philosophy of religion,
philosophy of science, philosophy of time,
philosophy of ethics, etc. at the university level. It's so people like Lawrence Krauss or Stephen Hawking can be critiqued when they tell a university audience that the universe came from absolutely nothing, when actual nothingness causes nothing.
heyyoulikecoconuts 4 days ago
@heyyoulikecoconuts->of which,may offer the possibility of being study or re-enact under virtual scenarios before experienced in real practice.- I think you're just too coconutty.
godof79 4 days ago
@godof79 Philosophers have claimed the universe had a beginning long before science. So through your empty rhetoric I was able to see that you have a shallow view of philosophy and a bloated view of science. I believe the two disciplines mixed together yields the best results.
heyyoulikecoconuts 4 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
In the end time will tell. I am not worried about anything. What do you lose by believing in Jesus? My question is if you died tonight do you know where you will be going? We all have souls. Choose whom you will live for today? because in the end there is a heaven or hell waiting. In the end there is no excuses and you cannot escape from God. Mocking God don't think God does not stand by His Word. He is true and remembers.Truly if you sincerely want to learn about salvation and Jesus just ask.
jusmusjc494 1 week ago
Comment removed
jusmusjc494 1 week ago
Comment removed
jusmusjc494 1 week ago
Christians live through Faith in God where science cannot explain. Believe it or not atheist have to have faith in hoping that a deity does not exist(God). The very fact that we exist there has to be a creator. We could not just evolve. The fact is that there has to be an absolute. If everything is relative then their is no solution for anything. There is a absolute right, wrong, beginning and end. If there is no absolute right or wrong then everything is acceptable. God is absolute truth.
jusmusjc494 1 week ago
@jusmusjc494 Nope, wrong again. A lack of belief in something based on lack of evidence does not fall under the definition of "faith". "The very fact that we exist there has to be a creator". Not logically sound, you are jumping to conclusions and making fallacy from ignorance, and false dilemma fallacy.
BillHicks420 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@jusmusjc494 "The fact is that there has to be an absolute". With regards to what? You are making word games. The entire reality exists of both absolutes and relatives. "We could not just evolve". Mind backing that up? "There is a absolute right, wrong". False, morality is subjective, as shown by world history and different cultures. "...beginning and end". Proof? "then everything is acceptable". According to who's standard?
BillHicks420 1 week ago
One man's theology is another man's belly laugh.
Okay, so there's a cosmic Jewish vampire who was his own father and can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because some rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree... yep, Christianity makes sense.
moldrad 1 week ago
@moldrad Turn to Jesus for the forgiveness of your sins. You are heaping up wrath for yourself on the Day of Judgment. Call it nonsense but at the end of the day, you will stand before God on that day all by yourself with no excuse. Its not wise to mock your Creator.
dmanpic 1 week ago
@dmanpic WOW you just hit on the main reason I'm a lapsed Christian! Any person who demanded that I love them or they will have you tortured FOREVER! Your scare tactics won't work on me because I'm an Erisian. Blessed Beets (not beats!) BTW I asked Yashua Ben Merriam or Har Nazar a long-haired radical socialist Reform Rabbi (AKA Jesus) to guide me and he put me to test the faith of you folks
moldrad 1 week ago
@dmanpic You don't seem to be paying attention. No- the only thing we have (potentially) established is that I have a *different* understanding of this god than you do. Your statement "You definitely have a misunderstanding of the God of the Bible." is a perfect demonstration of the danger inherent within Christianity for precisely this reason. You have, as I pointed out numerous times, done absolutely nothing to justify your claim that your specific "understanding" is [cont]
LeonhardEuler1 1 week ago
@LeonhardEuler1 [cont] correct- you simply assert it and tell others that they are "definitely" wrong. That is exactly the mindset of the monsters who perpetrated atrocities like the crusades.
LeonhardEuler1 1 week ago
@LeonhardEuler1 I stand by my statement. You have no idea who this God is. You mock what you don't understand and blaspheme what your maker. Thats not a good position to be in.
dmanpic 1 week ago
@dmanpic Of course not- it is a creation of your imagination and desires and I am not privy to the inner-workings of your mind. You are the only one who will understand, fully, your conception of god. But that is But that is irrelevant- you still completely missed the point. If you feel like you understand god (hardly humble, I should point out) then whatever- go ahead. Why should anyone believe you that your god concept is correct? [cont]
LeonhardEuler1 1 week ago
@LeonhardEuler1 [cont] And please don't insult me with your petty threats. The position I am in is being a good person, as well as being honest with myself and asking honest questions of a being which supposedly wants my eternal praise and adoration. If that is a bad thing in this being's eyes, then it can go fuck itself- I am better than any being which denounces honest inquiry.
LeonhardEuler1 1 week ago
@LeonhardEuler1 Pleaseee reconsider. If you were in the middle of the street and there was a car coming and you didnt see it and I saw it and didn't say anything, I would be evil on that account. Well the situation is alot graver. I am pleading with you to get out of the proverbial street of God's wrath. Jesus is the only way to salvation.
dmanpic 1 week ago
@dmanpic Look, I understand where you're coming from, and I have no problem with you attempting to save me from the metaphorical car (especially since this is your video, and you are responding to my comment- not coming to me and pestering me when I've shown no interest, or attempting to enact laws to force me to believe as you do, etc.)- I get it. My point is.... let me try to elucidate my point with a question. What if I came on here and told you that [cont]
LeonhardEuler1 1 week ago
@LeonhardEuler1 the bible was a Satanic lie, designed to lure people away from god, and that the only way to salvation was to reject Jesus (which would be, in this scenario, rejecting Satan)- how seriously would you take my pleads? Does it matter that I am sincerely attempting to get you out of the proverbial street of god's wrath? Or would you require something to substantiate my claims? You see- without that justification, your pleads simply fall on deaf ears. And [cont]
LeonhardEuler1 1 week ago
@LeonhardEuler1 [cont] , in my opinion, that is how it should be- reserve belief until sufficient justification has been presented. Also, as I said before, I fail to see how this is an insult to a perfect and omnibenevolent being- if it has a problem with my epistemology and my conduct (or feels that the former out-weighs the latter), then I am not interested in that being- I don't want its "salvation."
Also, *pleas ;)
LeonhardEuler1 1 week ago
@LeonhardEuler1 I got you man. Things are easier if God doesn't exist though right? You get to live how you want to live and not be restricted by a transcendent moral code that demands sinners will pay for the sins we commit. The world is marked by sin, death, and vain pursuits. We need a Savior. Jesus is justification alone that He is the only Savior.
dmanpic 1 week ago
@dmanpic No, I think it is quite the opposite. I think people who make this statement tend to be missing the fact that living in a universe without a god does not mean we are living in one without each other. We absolutely cannot live how we want. Not being restricted by a transcendent moral code is very different from not being restricted at all. Personally, I think it is tremendously more difficult to [cont]
LeonhardEuler1 5 days ago
@LeonhardEuler1 [cont] contemplate the deep and complicated moral questions we face than it is to simply say "this book (or my preacher, etc.) says this is the right choice. Done. No thought or effort required." Granted, that may be a bit of a simplification, but I think it suffices to say that I the true difficulty lies in the aforementioned contemplation, in recognizing ones own ability to affect those around themselves, [cont]
LeonhardEuler1 5 days ago
@LeonhardEuler1 [cont] and in understanding and enduring the consequences of those actions. The world may be marked by evil, but, personally, I see that as more of a problem for your own worldview containing an omnibenevolent god than as necessitating a savior for humanity.
LeonhardEuler1 5 days ago
@LeonhardEuler1 Hmmmm I wonder why "recognizing ones own ability to affect those around themselves and in understanding and enduring the consequences of those actions." works so efficiently?? Secular humanists esteems man too highly. We naturally love playing god and taking all the credit for every good thing that happens. But if something disastrous or catastrophic happens, agnostics/atheists are the first to show their irate hatred at God who they believe doesn't exist anyway. Contradiction.
dmanpic 4 days ago
@LeonhardEuler1 Because there is no other god like Jesus. No other person or being compares with Him.
dmanpic 1 week ago
Craig didn't even answer the question What the student asked was even if there is a god and there is obj morality,how do we know what they are?cuz like craig said, what us humans say is moral or immoral is purely based on sociological factors of each culture.So how do we know that the Nazis were truly evil? only person that can tell us is god accding to craig.But problem with that is the Nazis and other evils thought they had god on their side so its simply 1 culture against another.
JAEKIM10 1 week ago
Atheism has no logic period
jusmusjc494 1 week ago
@jusmusjc494 The lack of belief in a deity due to a void of evidence is not logical? Oh please, do tell why...
BillHicks420 1 week ago
@jusmusjc494 Atheism appears devoid of logic to you simply bc nature neglected you a brain(so much for intelligent design)lol.
godof79 1 week ago
Or you can ignore the fact that Craig talks in circles and doesn't answer anything.
jib1000 1 week ago
1 Peter 3:15....
Answer you coward...
Zentz29 1 week ago in playlist Uploaded videos
1 Peter 3:15 still applies.
It doesn't say to give an answer until you run out of excuses.
Zentz29 2 weeks ago in playlist Uploaded videos
That just demonstrates your god's immorality. If your god exists, he set up a system where we only know a tiny bit of what is objectively moral, but we are considered guilty of the things that we cannot possibly know are immoral
If this objective standard exists, obviously your god isn't immoral because he is the author of morality, but he is still subjectively immoral by any human standard.
Any human would be considered immoral by our subjective standard for doing what you think your god did.
Zentz29 2 weeks ago
@Zentz29 I'm not a coward. The truth is you know enough to realize you need forgiveness for your sins against God. Call it subjectivity or objectivity or whatever, you sinned against a perfect, Holy, righteous God. You need a Savior just like me. Please humble yourself and realize your inability to save yourself or work off your sin debt. Jesus lived a perfect life, fulfilling all of God's commands. He suffered, died, and rose so that wicked sinners can be forgiven and reconciled to God.
dmanpic 1 week ago
@dmanpic How is your god perfect, if your god commits the same sins as we do?
Zentz29 1 week ago
@Zentz29 You look at things from a tainted lens. God cannot not be perfect. (Double negative to emphasize the point).
dmanpic 1 week ago
@dmanpic No, the truth is not that i know I need forgivness. That's the problem with you christians & muslims. You just can't accept the obvious fact that there are people who don't think the way you do.
I guess there is some truth to that. I do need forgiveness from PEOPLE when I do something wrong, but I don't need it from your imaginary friend.
You're not seeking truth, you're trying to defend a preconcieved belief. You don't understand the difference because you are delusional.
Zentz29 1 week ago
@Zentz29 Imaginary friend. That never gets old. I'm not just trying to help you, I'm trying to point you to eternal life. Why wouldn't you want to be forgiven by God? And Muslims and Christians are not remotely the same. We are on opposite ends. Christians are saved by grace alone not by works. But its all the same to you right?
dmanpic 1 week ago
@dmanpic I'm done being nice..
You are a moron. William Lane Craig himself said that if you cannot discredit the premises of an argument, you should accept it.
You are a fucking LIAR & a COWRD...Fuck you.
We're done.
I have basically proved to you that you are wrong, but you reject what I say. Even William Lance Craig would be disgusted by your ignorance. You are a deluded fucking waste of life...Fuck you...
Zentz29 1 week ago
@Zentz29 Wow. . . . Thank you for being honest. God bless you.
dmanpic 1 week ago
I removed my last comment because it was wrong.
Anyway, an "objective standard" would include every possible action any human being could possibly take.
We know for a fact that driving cars is bad for the environment. Is it immoral to drive a car? If there is an objective standard there is an unquestionable answer to that.
The things we collectively/personally agree on are not even the tip of the iceburg. So ok, if what you say is true, most of our morals are subjective.
Zentz29 2 weeks ago
Comment removed
Zentz29 2 weeks ago
Greatest question? Don't know how you drew that conclusion. Craig is great at saying a lot, without actually saying anything. I remember doing this when I was at university. I'd leave writing some essays until the very last minute. My only option was to saturate page after page with unnecessary technical and scientific language in an attempt to obfuscate my lack of knowledge. The vast majority of the time, my lecturers saw right through me. Well, Dr. William Craig, I see right through you.
urprivacypolicysucks 2 weeks ago
@urprivacypolicysucks Greatest question because the kid appeared morally responsible for sinning against God. He had a heart felt concern for His own soul. Its a question and concern we all should be faced with and realize the only hope in found in Jesus Christ.
dmanpic 1 week ago
@dmanpic I don't want to get in to a discussion about whether god exists, so all I'll say is, this kind of guilt this kid is suffering is, aside from the wars and infringement of civil rights, one of the main reasons I hate religion.
urprivacypolicysucks 1 week ago
@urprivacypolicysucks And atheism/agnosticism is a better option? Why?
dmanpic 1 week ago
@dmanpic It's not really an "option" as such. You can't just suddenly choose to believe or not believe in god. Either you believe because that's what you've been taught, or you use critical thinking skills to decide you can't believe based on the complete lack of evidence. It's better than religion because atheism doesn't drill guilt and fear in to people. No wars will ever start in the name of atheism. No planes will be flown in to buildings in the name of atheism. I have plenty more examples.
urprivacypolicysucks 1 week ago
@urprivacypolicysucks Ummm Josef Stalin, Pol Pot, Mao Zedong, Hitler (please don't say he's christian). Bottom line, the problem is not religion but its mankind. Our sin drives us to do the incomprehensible. We all need Jesus for the forgiveness of our sins.
dmanpic 1 week ago
@dmanpic Wrong again Buck'o. None of which you mentioned started war BECAUSE of atheism. Atheism has never been an underlying reason for war, unlike religion. As a matter of fact, ironically enough, those same people rose to power due to the same reasons why religion is bad. Dogma, religiosity, worship of a figure and lack of independent thinking skills. Good try though. why wouldn't we say Hitler was Christian, when history show that he was?
BillHicks420 1 week ago
@BillHicks420 Im in agreement with you,although Hitler was actually catholic.Nonetheless,at the end of the day one more religious mega-nutbag.
godof79 1 week ago
@godof79 Yeah he was, but Catholicism is a branch of Christianity.
BillHicks420 1 week ago
@BillHicks420 There will always be counterfeits and Hitler was one. You know a counterfeit by measuring it up against the real thing: Jesus Christ. Okay so tell me why I should be atheist?
dmanpic 1 week ago
@dmanpic Sure, just ignore all my response and points. Sure, I'll play that game. What do you mean Hitler was a "counterfeit"? "Should"? You can be whatever the fuck you want, I don't care either way. The reason I'm an atheist is because there are equal claims of 1000's of Gods, religions and doctrines, all claiming to be right, and all with equal amount of "evidence". There simply exists no evidence for a God, especially a god with given attributes like the one you believe in.
BillHicks420 1 week ago
@BillHicks420 you live a hopeless life. Only Jesus can give you eternal life.
dmanpic 1 week ago
@dmanpic Good comeback man. Does the cognitive dissonance hurt? It should. Good luck with your mental brain tumor.
BillHicks420 1 week ago
@BillHicks420 Thanks man.
dmanpic 1 week ago
@dmanpic That's too bad, just because you say, "don't say Hitler was a christian", doesn't make it untrue. From Mein Kampf: "Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord.". There are LOTS of other quotes, just look at the wikipage on "Adolf Hitler's religious views". The other tyrants you mentioned didn't oppress/kill people in the name of atheism, if so, show me evidence.
urprivacypolicysucks 1 week ago
@urprivacypolicysucks Any way you slice it we're all evil and we need divine forgiveness. You agree?
dmanpic 1 week ago
@dmanpic Of course I don't agree. I don't believe in evil and I don't believe in the divine.
urprivacypolicysucks 1 week ago
@dmanpic You should watch the series "Why I am no longer a Christian" by user Evid3nc3. It's an excellent series (playlist on his channel). It's relatively long, it gets pretty deep at times and I don't think it has been completed yet, but if you care at all whether you beliefs are true or not, you should try at least to see it from an ex-devout christian point of view. What have you got to loose?
urprivacypolicysucks 1 week ago
@urprivacypolicysucks Your right. I would have nothing to lose. So you don't believe in evil?? Please elaborate. I haven't heard that one in a while. I'm intrigued by the way you view this broken fallen world.
dmanpic 1 week ago
@dmanpic The words "good" and "evil" are abstract human constructs. The universe is indifferent to "good" and "evil". People who do bad things (by their society's standards) are only bad subjectively. What I'm trying to say is all morals are subjective. I don't know what you think on the matter, but many religious people would think gay people deserve to go to hell, while most secular people would think that opinion is "evil". The world is not "broken" or "fallen" - people are just being people.
urprivacypolicysucks 5 days ago
@urprivacypolicysucks Your absolutely right. People are just being people. I say that there is something fundamentally wrong with people, me included. Subjectivity kills the intellectual mind. Lets think about it. If morality depends solely on societal norms, how does a country like U.S. justify itself in interfering in the affairs of the Nazis? That was their society correct? Could it not point to a universal thread that humanity is bonded by in which an inherent moral code is embedded in us.
dmanpic 4 days ago
Comment removed
urprivacypolicysucks 3 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@dmanpic That's right, there are common moral threads, but they depend on era and culture. Morality has evolved and continues to evolve. Compared to a few centuries ago, global moral values have changed radically. Not long ago, it wasn't considered immoral to own slaves, now it is. Some people think it's immoral to be homosexual, most do not. Some countries think capital punishment is immoral, others do not. Some countries don't let women vote, most do. Where's the objective morality?
urprivacypolicysucks 3 days ago
@dmanpic Most morals are taught, some are somewhat inherent, but only by our evolution. What do you think would happen to a species who thought it was a good idea to kill every other member of its own species, including their offspring?
urprivacypolicysucks 3 days ago
Christians: please stop saying your morals are objective, it is not. What you think is right or wrong from your Bible is merely your own view, your own interpretation. Many of us (including other sects of Christians btw) don't agree with this, and this makes your morals essentially subjective, same as ours. All morals are subjective. How we cope with this diversity of opinion to make a functional society is a different issue.
Casshyr 2 weeks ago
@Casshyr Morals do look subjective but understand if they are there can't be anything "right" or "wrong". Which means 9/11, the holocaust, slavery, etc. are all just the person's opinion that that particular activity was wrong and not flat out evil. There is a huge difference and huge consequences to that view.
dmanpic 1 week ago
@dmanpic it's not just a view, it is the truth. Even if there is indeed a set of rules that mankind should follow, our society is too heterogenous for this to be applied globally. So this essentially means morals will always be subjective, as long as multiple viewpoints exist within our society.
And fyi, majority of Christians thought slavery was a good thing, and they justified it with the Bible. Our concepts of morals change over time. It's called social evolution.
Casshyr 1 week ago
@Casshyr Yes. As an African-American I am well aware of that fact. Here's the thing, human beings are sinful wicked people who are selfish by nature. Just look at society. It is possible for people to twist Scripture for their own evil means. All I know is that Jesus Christ is a forgiver of the worst of sinners. That includes slave owners, murderers, rapists, liars, thieves, adulterers, drunkards, and any in between. His love cannot be denied.
dmanpic 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@dmanpic Yes, i agree that is your interpretation. But for the sake of peace and maintaining order to society, i would suggest you keep that view to yourself rather than going about trying to convince others why your interpretation of the Bible is correct and all others are wrong. In the end, i believe in the principle of "keep your religion private". We have at least 200+ religions right now in this world. Imagine if all of them start preaching actively like Christianity...chaos!
Casshyr 1 week ago
@dmanpic It is not a "view". It reflects reality and history. Morality evolves.
BillHicks420 1 week ago
@dmanpic Yes, individuals and groups of individuals define what's right and wrong. There were many muslims who thought 9/11 was right. Many Nazis thought the holocaust was right. They didn't think it was evil. Many, if not most, christians and muslims think homosexuality is 'immoral' - well, the rest of us think this kind of thinking is wrong (some would say "evil") - it's all subjective and you know it.
urprivacypolicysucks 3 days ago
@urprivacypolicysucks if its subjective then there is no reason to say what they did is evil because our morals mean nothing they are just artificial rules placed on us by society for the better interest of the public.
I disagree, these acts you mention are simply universally wrong many Nazi's wrote about how they knew these things were wrong. The golden rule is universal and known by empathy a trait everyone has to some degree. If its in our DNA as you suggest that would support a designer.
ShawnSwander 2 days ago
Oh, & by the way, if you did mean "conscience" instead of "conscious". I appreciate that you're refuting your own arguments for me, but I'm doing just fine dubunking your claims on my own.
=o)
Zentz29 2 weeks ago
why is this the greatest question? lots of Christians treat themselves as if they are terrible because they cant live up to the bibles teachings.
Magician12345 2 weeks ago
I don't wish for a world without god, because thats what I already live in. A world without religion will suffice . . .
I'm convinced there is no god, never was. None can prove his existence...I now can say I'm spiritually and mentally 100% free to evolve as an induvidual...and GOD it feels great..
Religion is a delusion cooked up in the stone age time of profound ignorance.
There'd be no need for faith if there were evidence,would there?
nogodism 2 weeks ago
The reason I don't believe in an objective standard is because I don't believe in a creator. I can't see a possible way that such a standard could exist without some form intelligent creator.
Don't get me wrong, if someone can explain how that standard could exist without a creator, I'm open to it.
I'm also open to a possible creator. I just havn't been convinced yet.
As far as any known religions, I'm still open to it, but I would not worship a god who acts like a human.
Zentz29 2 weeks ago
@Zentz29 Jesus did not act like a human. He was fully human and fully God. Yes its hard to believe because no one was ever like that which makes Jesus all the more unique. He is the only answer for this world because He is the only one who paid the penalty for our sins. There's a a WHOLE lot more to Jesus but He came into the world to save sinners. His personhood is unrivaled by any other figure in history.
dmanpic 2 weeks ago
@dmanpic Yes Jesus absolutly did act like a human. He got really pissed when he turned over the tables in the temple, didn't he?
I forgot to add that to my last comment. That is only one of MANY human characteristics that your god has.
jealousy, anger, hate etc etc...
If you want me to specify, please let me know.
Your god is made in man's image, not the other way around. It's obvious.
Zentz29 2 weeks ago
lolz...
I messed up again, but you know what I mean...
Zentz29 2 weeks ago
Well, I've made my case that morality is subjective (at least for most people) & neither you or anyone else can refute it. Can you at least admit it?
I wonder why it is that christians always tend to start ignoring me when we get to the same point I got to with you.
Morality for humans is subjective wether an objective standard exists, period. Not only that, but the objective is absolutly to anyone who doesn't know it.
P.S. I don't really wonder why christians ignore when we get to this point...
Zentz29 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Zentz29 I messed that up a bit. I meant:
Morality for humans is subjective wether an objective standard exists *or not*, period. Not only that, but the objective *standard* is absolutly to anyone *useless* to anyone who doesn't know it.
Zentz29 2 weeks ago
The Kalam Cosmological Argument is very weak, especially because it shamelessly uses probability incorrectly.
BER2ERKER 3 weeks ago
I'm surprised that his best argument is the Cosmological Argument. That's purely a perspective based argument, and anyone who isn't a theist isn't going to find that convincing.
BER2ERKER 3 weeks ago
janterrirocks Try a dictionary! FFS!
13aBOC 3 weeks ago
Thanks for posting BTW! I attempted a similar post on 'One of the Silliest Follow-Up Questions Ever!' and thus far it has been vetoed. I guess the moderator there only wants to hear one side of the argument!
NUAGESA 3 weeks ago
Pursuing the genocide theme I found Deuteronomy[7:2-6 & 20:16,17]. Not wishing to misinterpret anything, I sought clarification from the footnotes to these verses in my NIV. Having read these, I half expected to see the initials A.H. appended. I couldn’t imagine even he could express the sentiment therein any more succinctly! Now I never thought of myself as a moral relativist but if this is where moral absolutes lead I’ll stick with my instincts – at least I know genocide is evil!
NUAGESA 3 weeks ago
@NUAGESA "There is a way that seems right to a man but the end thereof is destruction" Proverbs 12. Your instincts can lead you in the wrong direction. Seek Christ. There is not one flaw in Him that you can point out.
dmanpic 3 weeks ago
bunch of rambling bullshit he said nothing...
Nodnal1234 3 weeks ago
@Nodnal1234 agreed, I couldn't even wait until the end of his answer, he never addresses the questions.
crispy380 3 weeks ago
Is WLC considered intelligent in the USA? If so I sincerely feel sorry for your children. How or why would anyone with more than 4 brain cells want to listen to that man? He hasn't a notion what he's talking about himself! LOL. People need to start thinking for themselves!
Please waken up people.
13aBOC 4 weeks ago
@13aBOC waken up?
janterrirocks 3 weeks ago
Religious people conveniently don't grasp the concept of morality and how it has evolved over the last 2000 years. There are no morals in nature unless we humans agree they're somewhat useful for the common good. Morals = the rule of law
ptij0404 4 weeks ago
@ptij0404 "Religious people conveniently don't grasp the concept of morality and how it has evolved over the last 2000 years." Nope - you are one who does not understand that turture little children is wrong inspite of any direction evolution may take.
girtkaz 4 weeks ago
@ptij0404 Morals are inherently placed inside of you to discern right from wrong. This was given by God.
dmanpic 3 weeks ago
@dmanpic when a child burns itself for the 1st time how come the child inherently didnt know it was wrong to play with fire..................????
stonewall1888 3 weeks ago
@stonewall1888 Your mixing apples and oranges. We're discussing morality not incidental occurrences. Why do children need to be taught to share, tell the truth, respect their moms and dads. Its because we're prone to be selfish, lie and disrespect them. We have a sin nature that necessitates God's intervention to save us. The situation is graver than we think. That is why we need Jesus.
dmanpic 3 weeks ago
@dmanpic Rubbish, morality also comes into play with survival mode, Good and bad is what it is. Another example if a child plays with a lighter, starts a fire and kills his family in the home. So your argument of GOD inherintly placing good and bad is thrown out. A child is yet to be educated in all things and its the parents who guide him or her into what morality is, which is in another word "being resposiblile with your actions"
stonewall1888 3 weeks ago
@dmanpic Actually you have no clue on child behaviour or human bahaviour, Studies on child behaviour in regards to sharing, lying, being selfish, giving love is all down to again survival. It is these virtues that make us stronger....not weaker. Please feel free to look it up before commenting back. Also if you feel children or your own are so selfish...why have you not killed them yet, your bible permits such slaughter. Of course you will cherry pick like most christains do.
stonewall1888 3 weeks ago
@stonewall1888 Clearly the brain has to develop so when someone becomes of age to make moral choices then their are awaken to their conscious inside of them. You need Jesus my friend. Plain and simple. Read about Him, know Him, surrender to Him. You cant lose if you do. You lose everything if you don't.
dmanpic 2 weeks ago
@dmanpic OH DEAR. I guess you need some comfort in your life. What do you want me to read in the bible?? I have said it once and will continue to do so - CHRISTIANS SUCH AS YOURSELF ONLY CHERRY PICK THE BIBLE, YOU DO NOT NOR WILL NOT FOLLOW ALL GODS COMMANDS, AS TO DO SO WOULD SHOW HOW SUCH THINKING IS BARBARIC, EVIL AND AGAINST ALL HUMAN MORALS THAT ARE TAUGHT AND ALSO KNOWN WITH OUT TEACHING.
So please if all you have is what you said then you have not said anything of value.
stonewall1888 2 weeks ago
@stonewall1888 I can explain to you every verse you think is barbaric but I doubt that will change your mind. Your heart needs to be changed and only Jesus can do that. His offer of salvation is open.
dmanpic 2 weeks ago
@dmanpic I can explain every verse in TED BUNDY'S biography, still makes him evil, barbaric, insane and without morals, so; no it wont change my mind.
The best one that makes me shudder is when your god let a new born baby die slowley, painfully to death for 7 days. WOW how about that for a GOD.
stonewall1888 2 weeks ago
@stonewall1888 "Slowly, Painfully" Where does it say that? The Bible of stonewall1888?
dmanpic 2 weeks ago
@dmanpic Aw, c'mon d. You're replying to everyone else & ignoring me again? Why's it gotta be like that?
Zentz29 2 weeks ago
@dmanpic “And the LORD struck the child that Uriah’s wife bore to David, and it became ill… Then on the seventh day it came to pass that the child died.” (2 Sam 12:15,18)
I dont know about you but the general thing about being ill is you suffer, now please dont be a hypocrite and also learn your bible before coming back with such a stupid comment. Hypocrite...yes you are.
stonewall1888 2 weeks ago
@stonewall1888 "The preaching of the cross is foolishness to those that perish"-1 Corinthians 1:18. Here's a life-saving tip for you. Man up, own up to your sin, humble yourself, and seek Christ for forgiveness. For your own sake please look into it. Its that serious.
dmanpic 1 week ago
@dmanpic You are a bit of a fool mate...honestly if you think the bible is soley based on christian belief and only came about after jesus (oh yeah almost 300 years after his death) then YOU are a hypocrite, you fail yourself as you do not know how to do any research or perhaps you can but the thought fills you with dread and so the "stick my fingers in my ears and go la la la la la" syndrome stays and you dont have to think for your self. I fear you lack in study in debates
stonewall1888 2 weeks ago
@stonewall1888 I took a class at a public university about this stuff. I'm not going to argue with you about KNOWN facts about the dates of the gospels. I refuse to engage in ignorant debates that is common knowledge.
dmanpic 2 weeks ago
@dmanpic You are not going to ARGUE?????? Well I was looking to debate but seeing as you have went to university and studied STUFF then I will back down, after all having a PHD in stuff is an athiest worst nightmare to debate. Besides known facts are useless against STUFF. Can you leave a list of where I can read STUFF...It sounds AWSOME.
hypocrite
stonewall1888 2 weeks ago
@dmanpic You can "lose if you ['surrender to Him']." You lose your integrity as a conscious, conscientious human being when you reject the faculties that allow you determine between fantasy and reality, how you would like things to be and how things really are.
Without Jesus, "the world can live as one," to quote Lennon, and work to improve our condition, instead of accepting divine authority.
Ematched 2 weeks ago
@Ematched Spoken like a true secular humanist who believe man is the supreme being. Your not the one on the throne, God is. He makes the rules and for some odd reason He sent His Son to save sinners like you and me from the penalty and power of our sins. The love of God is beyond understanding, yet real.
dmanpic 2 weeks ago
@dmanpic Wonderful assertions. However, none of them have yet to be proven true.
You spin a fine web of delusions: "His Son" "sinners" "sins" "beyond understanding." You might as well speak about "nothing" being "beyond understanding." That might actually prove useful, unlike your mindless blathering about your celestial daddy.
Ematched 2 weeks ago
@Ematched Ouch.
dmanpic 2 weeks ago
Craig likes to argue that objective morality exists, but he never wants to discuss specifics. Why? Because then he'd have to admit that no one, not even Christians, can agree on what these moreal values are. If we can't figure out what this Objective values are, then how can we be certain they exist in the first place?
Springheel01 4 weeks ago
@Springheel01 On the contrary, Christians believe that the conscious gives light to the moral standards that we are held by. You believe (hopefully) that murdering, stealing, lying, etc. are wrong. The Bible says its not by accident to why you believe that. Its not society that instills those truths inside of us but God Almighty. It is to lead us to cross of Christ.
dmanpic 3 weeks ago
@Murdulo How would you be able to feel an unknowable God? Why would anyone think that, assuming that that is what Christians believe, which it isn't? People meet God in his Son and the testimony about him recorded by the people there. You can deny the truthfulness of such a testimony but don't give me this nonsense that I believe in God only because I "feel it". Straw man argument friend.
TrgP123 1 month ago
Theists most common premises:
1. There exists an unknowable god, and I know so because I feel it.
2. It has the following properties: (...)
Any rational person can see why the first premise is unjustified, and the second one in direct contradiction with the first one.
Murdulo 1 month ago 8
@Murdulo Your first premise is off by a long shot. Feelings are not a necessary condition for God's existence. God exist necessarily. He created us in His image and we deny His existence because we love our sin and hate God. Our hearts our evil. We want to be the gods of our own lives. Christ came to save us from not only God's wrath, but also our wicked selves. His gift is wide open for anyone to receive it.
dmanpic 3 weeks ago
@dmanpic "God exist necessarily". Mind backing that up? The rest is rhetoric drivel.
BillHicks420 3 weeks ago
@BillHicks420 It means that His existence is does not depend on our feelings but our existence depends on His existence. No God, no life. How does that sound?
dmanpic 3 weeks ago
@dmanpic No god, no life is yet another claim without any truth value. For example, I could make the same claim, but substitute Allah or Odin. "Our existence depends on his existence" is also another claim without anything to back it up.
BillHicks420 3 weeks ago
@BillHicks420 What do you think about this quote about atheism? “The belief that there was nothing and nothing happened to nothing and then nothing magically exploded for no reason, creating everything and then a bunch of everything magically rearranged itself for no reason whatsoever into self-replicating bits which then turned into dinosaurs. Makes perfect sense.” The laws of Thermodynamics necessitate a Creator.
dmanpic 2 weeks ago
@dmanpic Strawman fallacy. Atheism is merely the lack of belief in a deity. Please elaborate on how the laws of Thermodynamics necessitate a creator? And while you're at it, why this God is your god in particular, and not the 100's of other creator gods?
BillHicks420 2 weeks ago
@BillHicks420 Absolutely. First off, the first law of thermodynamics says that energy is neither created nor destroyed and that it is conserved and is capable of being converting to different forms of energy. If energy is not created, then how did our existence come to be, without an external factor playing a role? The 2nd law states that the amount of useable energy is decreasing as time progresses and the amount of chaos is increasing. It points to a starting point in the universe.
dmanpic 2 weeks ago
@dmanpic Yes, the universe is in equilibrium. It is a zero-sum game when it comes to energy. You also forget to mention that it is about an ISOLATED, or closed system. Furthermore, we don't know the bounds of the universe, and so we don't know as it qualifies as a thermodynamic system. Where do you get that "chaos is increasing" and "amt. of usable energy" decreases? usable energy decreases WITHIN a system as energy transfer happens.
BillHicks420 2 weeks ago
@BillHicks420 The 2nd law points to a beginning point in which the amount of useable energy was a a certain finite level. For something to have a beginning, there must be an instigator present. The reason the God of the Bible is that God is because creation shows that God is immanent and cares deeply about mankind. He sent His Son Jesus to Earth to pay the penalty for guilty sinners who deserved His righteous judgment. No other person paid my sin debt. Jesus revealed this God.
dmanpic 2 weeks ago
@dmanpic The second law certainly do not point to such an event. Like I said, we don¨t know the thermodynamic qualities of the universe as one system, because we do not know its bounds. "For something to have a beginning, there must be an instigator present." Fallacy from ignorance. You are simply asserting this, without knowing. You are assuming that the universe had a beginning. We simply don't know. But in any case, you are jumping to the conclusion that this is instigator is YOUR deity.
BillHicks420 2 weeks ago
@BillHicks420 Umm your a little late with scientific research because it has been proven that our universe CANNOT be eternal. The second law alludes to that so clearly. Yes I jumped to a conclusion that it is the God of the Bible. But it makes a ton more sense than anything else.