Religulous Is Ridiculous - An Attempt at Review

[MsAreval]

man you are the most ugliest dude in the freakin universe

[CRoadwarrior]

@MsAreval So says the person who HIDES and is afraid to show a face online.

[PatzerKing]

Roadwarrior, the links aren't working for me. Were they taken down on the other site?

[CRoadwarrior]

@PatzerKing Sorry about that. But the original website where I posted them was acquired by another company. I will try to repost them somewhere else.

[TimJMorrison]

I think you've been playing too much fallout 3.

Religulous was just a bunch of interviews.

[CRoadwarrior]

@TimJMorrison Nope. The movie was interviews with a point, and with distortions, omissions and an agenda.

[bumper302]

What's wrong with you do you ever leave your house? I would advise that you 1.stop watching wrestling, 2.get a girlfriend if you don't have one & stop behaving like a 15 year old because you come off quite childish.

[CRoadwarrior]

@bumper302 Actually, I do alot of adult things. One of which is to dispel disinformation, misinformation, and misconceptions. You are in NO position to give me advice, child. You don't know me or what I have, and I'd rather present facts in an entertaining and educational manner and "come off" as childish than to be deceived and truly BE childish in how I respond to my elders.

[deliciousmorton]

I'm betting that this guy expects to be taken seriously.

[CRoadwarrior]

And I'm betting that there's a reason why you ignored the facts presented which even an atheist who made a response video AGREES with me on. LOL.

[deliciousmorton]

no, i'm just laughing at your costume.

[CRoadwarrior]

LOL...good, but the "costume" does not change the facts presented.

[deliciousmorton]

wasn't paying attention. i was distracted by your costume.

[thelivingfire]

Oh yea a documentary film about a intellectuals inquisitive journey around the globe challenging arbitrary laws, discriminatory belief systems and the flawed history of all religions is nowhere near as smart or interesting as some moron babbling so incoherently that he can not be understood. I hope you realize that the very catholic religion you are defending endorsed slavery in the United States calling it gods gift to the white man

[CRoadwarrior]

lol. The only thing "documentary" about Bill's movie is that it documented his ignorance, stupidity and ability to rely on unreliable sources for his claims.  Whether or not the catholic religion, which I am not, endorsed slavery is not an issue. The Bible properly interpreted does not.

[madjimms]

@CRoadwarrior Define "properly interpreted"

[CRoadwarrior]

@madjimms I would think that is self explanatory. You can misinterpret any literature if you don't have basic reading comprehension skills or do not research ancient documents and cultures that are not readily understood in our time.

[madjimms]

@CRoadwarrior Unless you live in the time period where the documents were compiled, then you have ZERO ability to understand them. DO NOT REPLY.

[CRoadwarrior]

@madjimms Nonsense. 

[CRoadwarrior]

thelivingfire. Even dumber is Bill's movie.

[kmesprtan]

their is no good deal with it its a fairy tale thats been passed down generation to generation kids to young to come up with a sophisticated response to what their being told just go with it... no god never was never will be science is always true because it uses something relegion is very uncomfortable with ......LOGIC!!!!!!!!!!!!

[CRoadwarrior]

LOL. You might want to learn better spelling. And you also might want to pay closer attention to my videos, as I use LOGIC all the time...sound logic, that is.

[CRoadwarrior]

pukeoncops123. While leaders and places CAN be placed in a work of fiction without the main characters being real, this must not be assumed. Fiction reveals itself, and the Gospels do not resemble the fictions of the time. And no, those people you mentioned are NOT all historians. You should have checked. And, being contemporary with Jesus means you at least lived when He was alive. You simply do not know what "evidence" is. And your comment about Christian "bs" now has you blocked.

[CRoadwarrior]

LOL.  Bye Pablo!

[fullback15rugby]

@CRoadwarrior why would the bible say its ok to have slaves if that was true then the EXODUS never would have happened. or be mentioned at least, i mean the bible even says (ill get back to you on the verse) that man will take advantage of another man to better his situation. very nice job and please dont play football with those lol.

[CRoadwarrior]

fullback15rugby. The Bible does not specifically say having slaves is "ok." In fact, the Bible has very clear rules against the slave rules of the time. While other cultures paid rewards for returning runaway slaves, God said NOT to do that and let them go free (Deut. 23:15,16). We simply have to be careful of how we define "slavery" because all "slavery" is not equal; otherwise, everyone today with a job can be considered a "slave" for the time period they work for anyone else.

[fullback15rugby]

@CRoadwarrior yeah i know im agreeing with you i just worded my sentence wrong, sorry bout it and your truthful some of us are slaves to the corporate world lmao

[Pablo113]

Why do Black people believe in a God that thinks Slavery is OK? Also, didn't African Americans have their own gods before they were dragged here on slave ships??

[CRoadwarrior]

I don't think the words "let my people go" from SLAVERY says God thinks slavery is "ok." Perhaps they did, and perhaps many of them followed the Judeo-Christian God. You might want to check your assumptions at the door of the browser.

[Pablo113]

In the New Testament, the Jesus character, says you should beat some of your slaves harder than others. The BIBLE is the reason given why the South thought it was ok to own slaves.

[CRoadwarrior]

Pablo113. You should never try to make reference to the Bible without a specific chapter and verse reference. I do know where you're getting that out of context idea, however. Jesus was NOT giving a command there, but was using contemporary language in a PARABLE to get across a point. A parable by it's very nature is NOT meant to be taken in a wooden, literal sense. Please go to school and learn some basics of interpretation, or at least learn it on your own. But learn it...

[CRoadwarrior]

And, I might add, Pablo113, The BIBLE is also the reason slavery was eventually ended in the same South, as abolitionists from there and all over refuted the misreadings of those who misused the Bible for that purpose. You might want to discuss this on my video pages about slavery. This video is NOT about that topic, even though I decided to address your false ideas here.

[Pablo113]

Your African American. You came from Africa. The Africians had their own religions back then. Your ancestors were forced to be Jesus worshipping convert ding-a-lings! You should thank JESUS for that one.

[CRoadwarrior]

Pablo. I know who I am. I know where my ancestors came from. Having a religion does not necessarily mean you had the TRUE God. All my people were not forced to be Jesus worshippers. In fact, historically, Christianity was in Africa long before the "white man" got there (Acts 8:26-39). You might want to check your assumptions, and you might want to study things more carefully, from history to the Bible.

[Pablo113]

You should do some research, I have. Jesus probably never existed, cause there is no such thing as original sin, therefore no need for him to die on a cross for us. Darwin killed Jesus and his dad in 1859. We are evolved primates. No Heaven, no Hell. Just this life and back to nothingness.

[CRoadwarrior]

ROFL. Telling me I should do some research is like telling me I should be male. No credible historian argues Jesus "probably" never existed. Darwin did no such thing. You are living in an atheistic dream world, Neo. LOL.

[Pablo113]

The Jesus character in the bible is FICTION, he may be based on someone. As I said before. Darwin eliminated Original Sin, so there fore no NEED for JESUS to die for our non existant sins! Of course, he would have know this because he is all knowing.

Yahweh=Jesus=Volcano God

[CRoadwarrior]

Again, Pablo113, credible historians do not argue that Jesus in the Bible is fiction. If you say that, then provide a credible historian for your claim. Darwin had nothing to do with original sin. If you cannot support your claims from credible sources, you will not be allowed to post here anymore. I have low tolerance for unsupported claims. Anyone can claim anything, but that does not mean your claim is based on FACTS.

[pukeoncops123]

Try providing credible evidence for Jesus' existence. You can't. Therefore, the logical conclusion is he never lived. The Romans had INCREDIBLY detailed records of all trials and important people during that time period, why is there no mention of a Jesus of Nazareth, son of Mary and Joseph? There were tons of historians during that time period, why do none of them mention a man named Jesus who led an incredibly popular movement? Because he isn't real. The gospels were meant to be fiction...

[CRoadwarrior]

pukeoncops123. Your "logic" is flawed on several levels. The fact that we do not now have Roman records of Jesus' trial is not proof that He did not exist. There were tons of historians during that time? Really? Name 10. And there is evidence from history that historians do leave things out. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.  LOL. And if the Gospels were meant to be "fiction," it makes no sense that they should contain so much verified HISTORY. Sorry, not gonna buy it.

[pukeoncops123]

I never said it was proven that Jesus never existed, I just said it was the logical conclusion. Appolonius, Appian, Damis, Phlegon, Favorinus, Epictetus, Lysias, Statius, Seneca, Phaedrus. There's ten. You can do a google search and find a whole list, not too hard. The gospels contain nothing that is history. Name one historical fact in the bible, minus the names of rulers or leaders. THERE IS NO HISTORICAL FACTS IN THE GOSPELS.

[CRoadwarrior]

pukeoncops123. As I said, your logic remains flawed. It is non sequitur, to use a logical terminology. Thanks for list, but all of them are not "historians" and all of them are not from the time of Jesus' life. You should have done more than a "Google" search. To claim that there are no historical facts in the Gospels is one of the most ignorant claims I've ever heard. There are Youtube atheists who would laugh at your statement. LOL.

[CRoadwarrior]

pukeoncops123. So, the first thing is this. Part of history is getting the names of rulers and leaders right. So you can't exclude "names of rulers or leaders" in historical recognition. So, we have Luke speaking of Lysanias the Tetrarch in 3:1, and an inscription has been found confirming this. The Gospels speak of the Decapolis (ten cities), and we have found almost all of them. Then there is the pool of Bethesda in John 5:2, which has been confirmed as historical.

[CRoadwarrior]

So that's just three of the many historical facts to be found in the Gospels, besides all of the archaeological discoveries confirming places and buildings we've discovered over the years. So I'd suggest you do some serious reading on the subject, because it is obvious to me you have done none.

[CRoadwarrior]

So in the spirit of helping dispel myths and bring enlightenment, I will recommend you read two books. One is called "The Historicity of the Gospels" by Craig Blomberg. The other is "The New Testament Documents Are They Reliable?" by F.F. Bruce. Bruce's book is available online. These works are by credible scholars in the field. You may also want to read works by Sir William Ramsay and Dr. Henry J. Cadbury on the reliability of Luke's Gospel especially.  The truth is out there.

[pukeoncops123]

Oh and don't talk to me about logic, I have my bachelors in philosophy with an ethics minor. I have taken several logic courses.

[CRoadwarrior]

pukeoncops123. I have 2 bachelors and I'm working on a Masters. I have several logic texts and I study them frequently. So I know logic quite well, and what I do know is that your logic here is flawed. If you don't know that, then you need to go over what you think you know. Your argument earlier is simply a non sequitur.

[pukeoncops123]

Find me some evidence, then your argument will be convincing.

[CRoadwarrior]

pukeoncops123. I've given you some evidence and resources for researching more of the evidence. Now try doing some serious study on your own.

[ComradeAgopian]

If you want to pretend you're a wrestler ( even a pro one ) , you're going to have to work on that pencil neck .

[CRoadwarrior]

ComradeAgopian. LOL. You make the warrior laugh.

[vadimcream]

So you didn't pay to see Religulous? Did you see it on television or steal it off the internet?

[CRoadwarrior]

Neither, vadimcream. I rented it.

[vadimcream]

Aha... ok, cool.

[jugganaut35]

Bill Maher-or any articulate atheist for that matter-would destroy you in an actual theism/atheism debate.

That's because theism is logically indefensible. Every proof ever advanced in its defense has been shown to be flawed or tautological.

With apologies to Richard Dawkins, all religions are essentially viruses of the mind. Christianity is a doormat philosophy. The more human doormats there are on this planet, the greater the Christian mind virus' chances of survival.

[CRoadwarrior]

LOL. jugganaut35. Please find me an "articulate" atheist that you think would "destroy" me in an actual debate. Most atheists with half a brain would not dare to debate me. The last one who did refused a second debate, either written or audio. Theism is logically indefensible? LOL. I doubt you even know the most basic logical principles with such an asinine statement as that. Like Dawkins, you also probably have little grasp of Christian doctrine. So, you find your atheist...

[CRoadwarrior]

In fact, now that I see what you were saying better, I would LOVE to make a fool of Maher, since he is so ignorant that even other atheists have admitted that he has made errors in his claims in Religulous. Please. I'd mop the floor up with Maher, as I am doing in my simple reviews.

[jugganaut35]

Don't take it personally. It's not an indictment of you individually.

NO theist would win a debate with an atheist. Given that there's no proof that God exists, no theist can ever carry the burden of proof to win such a debate since the burden of proof rests with the affirmative proponent (i.e., the theist).

It's around this time that the typical theist will spout off, "But you can't prove God DOESN'T exist!", employing the first of their (usually) many logical fallacies.

[CRoadwarrior]

LOL. I can see, jugg, that you've not seen many good debates where theists trashed atheists. Your claim that there's no proof is itself a foolish and ignorant claim, showing just how little you know of the evidence. I am not a "typical theist," as most do not know and study Greek and Hebrew, science and logic.

[jugganaut35]

Not much of a "road warrior" when you disable commenting on most of your uploads. More like a road wuss, if you ask me.

"Science flies you to the moon. Religion flies you into buildings."-- Victor Stenger

[CRoadwarrior]

Another one making assumptions. There is a valid reason for my approval of comments. I bet Victor wouldn't say that if he had to stay in a hospital like First Presbyterian or Mt. Sinai. Special pleading nonsense. LOL.

[jugganaut35]

If you say so, but it just isn't very "warriorlike" to hide behind the "disable comments" function. Seems to me a roadwarrior would take on all comers regardless.

I'm sure Victor would have no problem staying in one of those hospitals. It isn't the prayer doing the healing in those hospitals, it's the science. Science gives a way better rate of return in healing illness than does prayer.

[CRoadwarrior]

Yes, I say so, since I inherently know the facts as to why I do what I do more than some stranger on the Net making assumptions. The point was, that those hospitals were made in the name of the great Healer Himself. The science is immaterial, and making claims about prayer when you probably have no real knowledge about it is unwise. There are times when the science is at a loss, and then God steps in and makes them go "wow."

[yvresse]

i don't know if you're random and insane or just plain genius LOL that was so funnyyyy wtf !!!

[CRoadwarrior]

Heyyy...I'd like to think that I'm just plain funny...looking...LOL.

[Yaymudkip]

>.o

I read you saying ''Christianity is supported by fact''

I pray to that god that you're trolling, then.

Faith=belief without evidence. That's the f00kn definition.

[CRoadwarrior]

Really? Faith is belief without evidence? And you get that "definition" from what Bible dictionary? Oh, that's right you didn't get it from an authoritative source. When you can find one, get back to me.

[littlegirl751]

hahaha, A freaking Bible dictionary?? You are just ridiculous.

[CRoadwarrior]

littlegirl751. What's ridiculous about appealing to a proper authority on a subject? Is it "ridiculous" to appeal to a science dictionary on a scientific word? Am I the one who is "ridiculous"? I think not.

[littlegirl751]

The fact that you would consider a "Bible dictionary" as a proper authority is what is ridiculous. How could anyone possibly translate what the Bibles authors intended?  NONE of us were around then. For all we know it could have been an LSD trip. haha. sorry, I'm just humoring myself. I mean, other than the Bible, there is not much credible documentation of these guys, if any.

[CRoadwarrior]

littlegirl751. I see you have lots to learn about proper authorities and logic. In terms of a Bible dictionary, we are talking about experts in languages and so forth who learn the meanings of words. We don't have to be around to know the meaning of words. That's nonsense. And I would suggest you do some study on the credibility of the Bible, which has much substantiation from other sources.

[MissDisastrous]

I seriously just spit my water out and laughed the entire length of this video. The Christian Roadwarrior? Am I being punked. Where the hell did you even buy that piece of... Wth is that? It's ironic for a christian to be so hellbent on facts when their religion is based on a book&faith.

[CRoadwarrior]

Yes, MissDisastruous. I am the Christian Road Warrior. No, you are not being punked, but atheists and unbelivers who fight against the faith DO get punked when they come up against the warrior. If you knew Christian doctrine and theology better, you'd know that Christianity IS based on facts, from historical to scientific to rational.

[MissDisastrous]

Heres your problem, you are mixing fact with belief, Fact is something thats been proven through observation and experience, Now belief is confidence in the truth or existence of something not immediately susceptible to rigorous proof, Nothing related to God or jesus christ is actual fact, No one has ever seen or observed jesus christ or god, Christianity is based soley on Assumption, faith, and Fear.

[CRoadwarrior]

MissDisastrous. I was unaware that I had a problem. However, you are very much unaware of the facts supporting Christianity. I would suggest you read and research the issue, starting with books like "Is the Bible True?" by Jeffery Sheler and "The Historical Jesus: Ancient Evidence for the Life of Christ" by Gary Habermas. Once you've done this basic research, you will know not to make the assumptions you have made about a belief system I have studied longer than you've been alive.

[MissDisastrous]

What are these facts you mention countless times, if you are so educated then why dont you enlighten me about these "facts" instead of repeating the word. That fact you are unaware of your problem doesn't surprise me, you base your explanations entirely on books. There are people who've been nose deep in harry potters books for years maybe know it word for word, doesn't make it true now does it?

[CRoadwarrior]

MissDisasterous. Let's not do the "Harry Potter" thing comparing it with the Bible. There is no valid comparison.  I base my explanations on "books" which contain facts. So do you. I've already given you two resources on these facts to check out. I suggest you commence to checking.

[MissDisastrous]

Both the bible and harry potter in my opinion are nonsense. Also if you cannot back up ur beliefs when confronted then it makes me doubt how much you actually know.

[CRoadwarrior]

MissDisastrous. Your opinion does not matter. The facts do. You can doubt all day. The fact remains that I am two degrees ahead of you in education while I work on a third. What that means is that I know things you have yet to study. But let me give you some historical facts that confirm the Bible for you to look up. Check the Moabite Stone, the Nuzi Tablets, Lachish Letters, the Dead Sea Scrolls, Pool of Bethesda, Pilate Inscription, and Politarch Inscriptions.

[littlegirl751]

An education doesn't mean you know things that other people don't.  Now you just sound like a pretentious ass.

[CRoadwarrior]

Actually, it does mean you know things that others don't, since that's part of what it means to get an education. What I said is a simple fact of life. If you can't get that, then you need to hit the books and stay off the Net. LOL. I'll let that "pretentious" comment slide...this time.

[littlegirl751]

An education isn't something you get from a piece of paper. As for it being "knowing things other people don't"....5 yr olds do that.

[CRoadwarrior]

Actually, education is something you get from learning, and the piece of paper is a symbol of the work done. My point is, those who have done the homework know their stuff better than those who haven't. And I know mine.

[CRoadwarrior]

Now of course there's much more, but these should help you understand that there is a VAST difference between Harry Potter and the historical veracity that is the Bible.

[CRoadwarrior]

LOL. Magellans...You make the warrior laugh. Now go and study some basic logic in the block zone.

[SoRedtheRose]

Christians aren't supposed to "hate" atheists. If you remember, Jesus himself told parables about the Good Samaritan...Samaritans were Jews who copulated with pagans...he didn't hate them...also, "crap" is a harsh word to come from a Christian mouth.

[CRoadwarrior]

SoRedtheRose. Where did I say I hate atheists? I didn't. I choose my words carefully, as I am a published author and editor. As for "crap," I really don't know where you're coming up with the idea that it is a "harsh" word coming from a Christian. I've heard plenty worse, and there's nothing in the Bible against the use of the word.

[gonyea12]

Hmm....

Not really sure what I'm looking at.

[CRoadwarrior]

gonyea12...Let me tell you what you're looking at - A Christian Road Warrior slappin down Bill Maher's silly claims! What a russhhhhh!

[LANDSofCONFUSION]

By the way if I may say four and a half stars. I think your gear should be adopted by the NFL.

[CRoadwarrior]

LOL...and there would be more people injured in the NFL as a result.

[LANDSofCONFUSION]

Friend you should not use the word hate, for hate is what satin wants us to express. We must try to understand everyone and every thing, only when you befriend others can you truly spread the word. When one looks for confrontation meet them instead with open arms and embrace them.

[CRoadwarrior]

LANDSofCONFUSION. There are things that even God "hates." So let's not pretend that Christians or God-fearing people are not supposed to hate. We can and should hate what God hates, things like sin and deception and evil (Deut. 12:31; Proverbs 6:16). Whenever I use the phrase, "Do you know what the warrior hates..." it is a mimic of a popular phrase used by the famous wrestler (Road Warrior Hawk) who became a Christian. It's a funny phrase I like to use at times.

[CRoadwarrior]

NSequeira. Name-calling and ad hominem attack will only get you into the Block Zone.

[Commiepoprocks]

Your a disgusting person.

[CRoadwarrior]

Commieoprocks. And you base that irrational opinion on what?

[NoWattz]

Just curious, are you saying that "youtube" would not allow you to upload a video for the fact that youtube was able to detect that you had used clips from a copyrighted product (the dvd)? If yes, what kind of software are you using for dvd ripping as well as what you are using for your own actual video production?

[CRoadwarrior]

NoWattz.  Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying. Sorry to take so long to respond, but when you first posted I was just recovering from a grooling semester of grad school. Anyway, I use DVD Shrink and Windows MovieMaker.

[NoWattz]

There is a program that is called "anyvideoconverter". It should be easy to find by search and it's free. It is a video format converter.( changes WMV vids to FLV vids ect.) By the method the program uses to re-format, it should remove any hidden copyright data that keeps getting detected. You may even be able to use it as a DVD ripper as well. I'm not 100% sure it will work, but I still say it would be worth at least one try.

[CRoadwarrior]

Been a little busy, caseagainstfaith. But your video has been posted. I have lots of video comments to check out, so you should realize this and be patient.

[epaminodas]

thanks for reuploading your review. i highly doubt that the 'atheists' did it - companies do this sorta stuff until they have the dvd out on sale. the dollar at work.

[CRoadwarrior]

The silly dollar at work, since my use is legal. I hate when companies don't do their own homework, and when YouTube actually allows the censorship.

[paladinsjt]

I hate people who don't do their homework too! People who wear garments made of more than one kind of fiber and then claim they're Christian wreck it for the rest of us.

[CRoadwarrior]

paladinsjt. I'm not sure what you're getting at with the Old Testament reference to clothing. Christians are not obliged to keep OT ritualistic laws. There is a reason why it's called the "New" Testament.

[Justinfh2point0]

And that's the bottom line. cuz Croadwarrior says so!

[CRoadwarrior]

Yeah!

[Justinfh2point0]

Um...is this channel a parody? If it is then awesome dude!

[CRoadwarrior]

Not a parody, Justinfh2point0.

[NOmeansnoFAN]

I would have enjoyed this so much more if it was.... *sigh

[CRoadwarrior]

Perhaps, but the facts speak for themselves.

[owheydusoapsk]

Hey CRW: I saw the movie. I thought it was entertaining but not a a scholarly documentary. I'm beginning to think there can't be productive debates on some issues because as you say, we bring presuppositions to the table. I do, you do, I think everyone does. This movie expresses a lot of my presupps.

[CRoadwarrior]

owhey...It was funny at points. I actually like Bill, but his ignorance in this "documentary" was beyond stupid. The movie was riddled with errors of fact as well as invalid assumptions, as even "caseagainstfaith" admitted.

[ReverendLondo]

I thought in the video you said you hated everything atheistic, yet here you admit liking Bill Maher. What's up with that?

Don't actually reply to that, I'm just making a small joke.

I've gotta say that the opening and closing segments of Religulous were really out of place. What the hell did anything he was saying during the entire course of the movie have to do with escalating violence and armageddon?

[CRoadwarrior]

ReverendLondo. I think his point was that religion is dangerous and will lead to what he perceives as "Armageddon."

[CRoadwarrior]

And, I might add, I am not only good with my persona, but good in presenting my points. I appreciate the complement, but I don't do videos for YOU or anyone else. And it is very easy to SAY everything (virtually) I say is nonsense, but proving it...another thing altogether. So far, no one has stepped up to offer any substantive debate. No one.

[CRoadwarrior]

caseagainstfaith. What you call "machismo" is clearly an act; an act like a specific wrestler (Road Warrior Hawk, to be exact). And I do it for a reason, which will be explained in detail in a video or two. Armweak didn't say exactly what you did. But his little "making love to yourself" comment was actually silly itself, although barely funny. And I can see you are fond of making unsupported claims. Survey the comments by even unbelievers who say I'm funny. I guess they're all wrong. LOL

[CRoadwarrior]

Funny, caseagainstfaith, but you're the only one so far to say I am "annoying and silly." And at least I try not to bore people to death by sitting in front of a camera and just talking. Many more people enjoy the humor. So perhaps you don't have a sense of humor. Easy to "pwn"? Easier said than done. I'll have a look at your vid, but so far I'm not impressed.

[CRoadwarrior]

caseagainstfaith. Well, it's good you at least recognize the lack of scholarship and errors in the movie. Some people didn't. No, I am far from easy to "pwn." In fact, since I've started doing videos on YT, no one has been able to do so. I posted anything that does not violate my simple and plainly posted rules on my channel. So that argument won't work.

[JuanT42]

You just delete the comments you can't answer to and pretend you're correct. If you were really interested in the truth, you wouldn't be defending every positive interpretation of the bible. "This was an attempt to support a belief system he already has." I'm starting to think this is parody as well.

[CRoadwarrior]

Again, JuanT42, you are making invalid assumptions. I do NOT delete comments that do not violate my clear rules posted on my channel. Comments are pending approval from all non-friends for a number of valid reasons. I AM into truth, which is why I listen to people like you who are woefully ignorant of the Bible and its composition and nature. Most who criticize the Bible have either never truly read it and understood it or they distort it to suite their own biases and assumptions.

[EchosFromaBlankMind]

You talk of the veracity of the bible, is that the same book that speaks of talking snakes, someone walking on water, burning and talking bushes, virgin births, all of the animals being made in a day or two, incest being ok, stoning of people, condoning slavery, so on and so on. If the bible was referred to as a book that has some tall tales and bits of the truth intertwined through its pages, then I would say fine. But to claim it as being the word of god, Now thats pushing it!

[CRoadwarrior]

Echos. That's right the veracity. There is only one talking "serpant" (it wasn't really the serpant talking, but satan), the pondskater walks on water all the time (and it's not God), one burning bush (God talking), one virgin birth (there is parthenogenesis in nature, imagine that), and your ignorance goes on and on. There's no "pushing it" here. Just the facts of history recorded by people who encountered the true and living God.

[EchosFromaBlankMind]

Ah yes, the same satan that god cannot or will not rid this world of. As for the pondskater, it cannot be compared to a man, since its appendages allow it to utilize the surface tension of the water to enable it to ride upon it, just like rubbing a needle through your hair, and not just some old sandals. There may be facts, but there is also a good heaping of author embelishment, sort of artistic license. It does not bode well that some of the delusional miracles only occured once in the bible.

[CRoadwarrior]

Ah yes, the old false dilemma fallacy that if God does not get rid of satan on our timetable, it means He can't or won't. Read Revelation. LOL. If God can create a pondskater with the ability to walk on water using surface tension, I don't think the Almighty has a problem with finding a way to do it with a man. Embellishment? Where? Just because something happened "once" does not prove it never happened. That's a non sequitur argument.

[EchosFromaBlankMind]

Its funny that you reference parthenogenesis with the virgin birth, this would indicate that Mary did not need a god/man in order to reproduce, and also that since humans use the XY sex determination system, the baby would have been a female, Great you just disproved the immaculate conception by your own admission!

Please refrain by calling others ignorant in order to portray yourself in a better light. I respect your comments and will treat them respectfully,I would expect the same in return

[CRoadwarrior]

Echos. You make me laugh with all the assumptions. No, I did not disprove the virgin birth. The doctrine of "immaculate conception" speaks of Mary, not Jesus. As far as my comments, I call out ignorance when I see it. Truth is truth. If you don't know something, you don't. But you can always LEARN. That's why I'm here. To dispell lots of ignorance out here, along with deception by those who fight against Christianity. My point is based on Romans 1:20 and its implications in creation.

[JuanT42]

The bible was written by people who never had any contact with Jesus. If you don't know that, no wonder you think the bible is historical fact. If your answer for everything is "God did it," and "It's true cause the bible says," then why not just say that instead of making long drawn out videos with silly voices. That's as far as your arguments go, because you're not even recognizing the point attempted to be made: No ancient book written in the absence of modern science is relevant anymore.

[CRoadwarrior]

JuanT42. You really should not speak about things you know little about. In the New Testament, the Gospels were written by people who walked and talked with Jesus or those who gained info from eyewitnesses. You are very clueless about the historical veracity of the Bible. I suggest you read up on modern archaeological science and learn. You can start with a book called "Is the Bible True?" by Jeffery Sheler. Don't assume what you know...KNOW what you know.

[JuanT42]

"the Gospels were written by people who walked and talked with Jesus or those who gained info from eyewitnesses." - This completely unfounded and incorrect.

So you're going to totally miss my point and tell me to read a book by a christian that says some of the things in the bible are partially based on reality. Even if that were true, why would that be evidence of God's existence, or Jesus's divinity? I'm starting to think this is parody by the way you're dodging the point, its too contrived.

[CRoadwarrior]

JuanT42. It is easy for you to SAY that my comment about the Gospels is "completely unfounded and incorrect," but there's evidence to back my claim. Who a book is written by is not relevant to the facts, which you are clearly ignorant of in this matter. And no, this is no parody.

[JuanT42]

"Who a book is written by is not relevant to the facts." If you believe that, no wonder you're religious. And again you did not address my point, you just keep saying evidence backs up your claim. The bible, or any other book ancient or modern is not evidence of God's existence of Jesus's divinity. Period. Thats the point of the movie, which you ironically try to refute with biblical evidence. MCFLY?!?! Maybe you've discovered a new genre, "unintentional parody."

[CRoadwarrior]

JuanT42. You might want to look up the genetic fallacy in logic, since what you argue is a precisely that error in reasoning. The issue is the facts, not whether or not the author is Christian. I can accept a fact from an atheist, as long as it's a fact. And I did address your point. You do not know the facts in this issue. You think you do. Have you read the book "Can We Trust the New Testament?" by John A.T. Robinson? I'm sure you haven't - AND he was not an evangelical Christian.

[JuanT42]

Your response proves you completely missed my point, because you keep listing books. Look at how many times you had to use the word "fact" to reinforce your world view. The reality is you're too scared to live in a world without an imaginary friend and immortality, so you point at books and say, "look the book said what I've been taught my entire life so I have facts." "There's evidence in the Bible that is corroborated by many different sciences" could you be more vague, please.

[CRoadwarrior]

LOL...It is clear you need to go do some study because you haven't. You have not read the evidence. I don't miss your point. You have no real point. You like to make claims that are not even supported by many liberal scholars. You haven't investigated the facts supporting the historicity of the Gospels, and yet you want to act as if you have. Try the science of archaeology, for example. You might learn a few things. And your straw men distortions of my claims will not work.

[CRoadwarrior]

And, once again, you are merely claiming that the Bible is not evidence of God or Jesus' divinity. But that's a mere claim without support, not a fact. So don't confuse your mere unfounded opinion with fact. There's evidence in the Bible that is corroborated by many different sciences that a Designer of the universe exists, so much so that unbelieving scientists have admitted to it. So, what's YOUR excuse? You have none, just as Romans 1:20 says.

[CRoadwarrior]

My defense is lame? If so, then what was presented in the movie was even worse. LOL Tackle the warrior? I don't think so. No one can "tackle" the warrior.

[CRoadwarrior]

I disagree. Humor was but one of its intents. Some of it was funny, but overall it was a joke.

[PraiseYeshua]

Look at the good side CRW, YHWH has a sense of humor with servants like us. Just look at that his mischievous streak when he dealt with the false god Dagaon in I Sam 5:2-4. Oh no, here he goes again...

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA

[CRoadwarrior]

Praise...I see you dig that humor with the Lord getting a kick out of Maher's ignorance. LOL. Ha Ha haaaa.

[randygandy]

stop hiding behind comment approval, its almost as your lame as your intro music.

[CRoadwarrior]

randygandy. No one is "hiding" behind anything. I have very valid reasons why I approve first. If you don't like it, change the channel. No one is forcing you to watch or post.

[randygandy]

The only other form of literature which does this is fiction which the bible is unfortunately, so take off those glasses you hid behind and realise that the thing which you study like a science is nothing more than a childrens bedtime story.

[CRoadwarrior]

randygandy. You show your ignorance is the same or worse than Maher's. I suggest you do some research into the veracity of the Bible instead of making the assumptions.

[randygandy]

You mention that its not necessary to recap the story of the virgin birth if there were 4 people in the room. But the gospels were written at differing times even decades apart, and to say that the reader would have prior knowledge about this so its not necessary to include this is ridiculous. Show me one quality academic article or textbook which doesnt fully explain a theory or an idea which it builds upon.

[CRoadwarrior]

randygandy. So what if the Gospels were perhaps written at different times. There is evidence they may have been written very close together, and ALL before AD 70. You also confuse ancient literature with "academic" textbooks. Didn't work that way.

[christoferL]

There's no link there!

[CRoadwarrior]

LOL... I know. I didn't know the video would process this fast.

[CRoadwarrior]

How about now? Are you able to view it?

[christoferL]

yep! Thanks

[CRoadwarrior]

Thanks...They can't stop the warrior!!! What a rushhhhh!!!