Added: 4 years ago
From: ProfMTH
Views: 6,336
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (88)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • @chirectomy I'm glad you're finding the videos useful. Thanks.

  • You need axioms to reason but you have to have faith in these axioms. Even atheists believe in things that cannot be proofed.

    Proverbs 3:5 means that your axioms have to be given by God and should not be funded by your small and false understanding of the universe. Sorry for my English.

  • Forgot to mention that "Fides et Ratio," the encyclical by JPII is another great resource for those wanting to delve into this more.

  • I would say a simpler way of putting faith and reason is that there are a good amount of items of our faith that can be found through reason alone, and therefore you could say that reason fully supports those items of faith. But then there are a good amount of items that cannot be found by reason alone, *but* the big distinction is that reason doesn't contradict these items of faith in any way.

  • If anyone is interested in how faith and reason related to each other, a first easy primer is found in the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

  • @BeatMasterPhil If you say so.

  • Hebrews 11:1: "Now faith is confidence in what we HOPE for and assurance about what we do not see."

    Wishful thinking: Thinking as if that which is hoped for or pleasing is true.

    Even the Bible, the #1 source of faith, says that faith is mere wishful thinking.

  • @drrobertoboogie97 Faith simply means to have confidence or trust in a person or thing.

  • @ndrummer99 Not religious faith.

  • @drrobertoboogie97 It is true that Christianity requires a measure of faith. I don't deny that. God is at liberty to explain things to us or withhold explanation without explanation. However, our faith in God is not a blind irrational faith. There are reasons to believe. Atheism also requires faith. Irrational faith that contradicts science at that. Faith in the belief that the universe and life are creations of other than intelligence is unscientific.

  • @ndrummer99 No. One vague anthology of thousands of years old books with anonymous authors containing the inane ramblings of Middle Eastern tribesmen is certainly not a proof. Not believing that said vague anthology is infallibly true doesn't require much faith, unlike believing it is.

  • @drrobertoboogie97 You have great faith in your doubts. You will never understand the Word of God as long as you see it through the lens of emotionally antipathetic repulsion.

  • @ndrummer99 I understand it much better than you do. I can see that it's merely the inane ramblings of the primitive mind, unlike you.

  • @drrobertoboogie97 If it's merely inane ramblings how do you account for the fulfilled Messianic prophecy of Jesus? The Scriptures were divinely written through man. Inspired by God, written by man.

  • @ndrummer99 "how do you account for the fulfilled Messianic prophecy of Jesus?"

    See my "Jesus Was Not the Messiah" series. All this fulfilled prophecy talk is nothing but pious fiction.

  • @ProfMTH "My strength is dried up like a potsherd, And my tongue cleaves to my jaws; And Thou dost lay me in the dust of death. 16 For dogs have surrounded me; A band of evildoers has encompassed me; They pierced my hands and my feet. 17 I can count all my bones. They look, they stare at me; 18 They divide my garments among them, And for my clothing they cast lots." What does that sound like to you? Does it remind you of if anything? It's a clear description of the crucifixion.

  • @ndrummer99 I'm aware of the alleged prophecies. As I said, my "Jesus Was Not the Messiah" series addresses them.

  • @ProfMTH In regards to Psalm 22, in support of each reading there are both MSS. The Polyglots of Potken, Antwerp, Paris, and London, have caari in the text, and caaru is referred to in the margin. This is the case with the most correct Hebrew Bibles. And besides, even if the correct translation is indeed caari like lions they maul my hands and feet, the passage would still apply indubitably to Christ's crucifixion.

  • Comment removed

  • @ndrummer99 Prove it. The only "proof" that your book is true is when you presuppose that it's true. Make an argument that's not a bare assertion and is not circular. The so-called "fulfilled prophecies" are only that if you assume they are fulfilled and the book captures the truth correctly which, again, is a circular argument.

  • @drrobertoboogie97 The Bible is not one book, but rather many books written by 40 different authors, over many different time periods. As for the prophecies, the Old Testament was completed around 400 B.C. This is a historic fact. There is no one anywhere, of any educational reputation who's studied it, that disagrees with this. So are you claiming that Christ, the fulfillment of the prophecies, is fictitious?

  • @ndrummer99 I'm not denying that it has 40 different authors. What I'm saying is that, the NT authors had access to OT, so they could've just written it so that it seemed to fulfill OT. Your whole argument is "NT is true, thus OT is true because NT fulfills OT, thus NT is true because NT fulfills OT". Can't you see the circularity?

  • @drrobertoboogie97 True, except the NT dates back to the era when people who had been alive when Jesus had were still alive. Why would they buy into something they new to be fabricated? The church did not create the resurrection stories; instead the resurrection created the church.

  • @ndrummer99 Wrong. The earliest written gospel, Mark, is dated circa 70 CE. You believe your "Jesus" died circa 36 CE.

    "the resurrection created the church"

    Which could only be the case if the resurrection story is indeed true, which makes your argument circular.

  • @drrobertoboogie97 We do not know that Mark was the earliest written gospel. Many of the gospels are thought to have been written much before 70 A.D. Also, 70 A.D. would still place them in the lifetime of Christ. That's 34 yrs. after his death.

    It's not circular logic. It's not an argument based upon the Scriptures, but upon the existence and survival of the church.

  • @ndrummer99 You don't say?

  • how dare you speak against the magical sky man, he will send you to hell like he did the unicorns!

  • how dare you speak against the magical sky man, he will send you to heel like he did the unicorns!

  • Faith is trust in delusion. It's self confidence in schizophrenic madness. It's wisdom without rational reasoning. It's tripping without chemical aids. It's hypocritical fleeing of healthy thinking, It's THE mask of the potentially most dangerous individuals especially because of the gang character of faiths. They are scared of themselves, what they would do without their faith, what proves my point.

  • So he discards the faith definition in Hebrews 1 and then spends the rest of the time making points about "faith" and "reason" by using the usual stereotypical atheist absurdisms. He did a great job of defending his own lack of reason.

  • Faith with no reason or prove? Good luck trying that in a court of law. I won't even mention science

  • There is no reason in the religion of Christianity...it is manmade and full of complete bullshit!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • There is no reason in the religion of Christianity...it is manmade and full of complete bullshit!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

  • Nice video, pure ownage.

  • If someone does not know the Holy Spirit, they do not know Christ. Romans 8:9 How then can you know or reason? You have not a reference point with God.

  • "How then can you know or reason?"

    Are you serious with this nonsense, SRobacker?

  • Sorry, I just meant from the first comment that it is not a matter of reasoning, but merely from what reference point a person reasons.

    With Christian faith though, it is more a experienced life. Christians often say that it takes the Holy Spirit to understand the scripture. They just don't know the depth of what they are saying. I know what it is talking about much better after I lived it out.

  • It's only reason if you actually know God. If you don't know Christ Jesus, you reason with out reference point to God.

  • ProfMTh: It's interesting how you used Faith Hill and Sophia Loren to represent faith and wisdom (philosophy) respectively. I found myself wondering which one I would choose if faced with a choice between the two.

  • It's self explanitory...watch the video, read the comment, job done.

  • One simple statement demolishes that whole video. They didnt even have a word for "faith" then in the context that we understand it :)

  • explain "they"

    who is that?

    and what are you even trying to say?

  • i once had the onpeness to consider the aproach to knowlage of the supposed harmonic relationship between faith and reason. empirically, however, basing myself on using reason when there is room for it, i came to realize that there is little to no room for faith (by which i mean theological faith). i see no point or significance to religious faith.

  • Come now, and let us reason together, saith the Lord; though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be like crimson, they shall be as wool. Isaiah 1:18

  • Is it your contention, Jeffraydunn, that this passage from Isaiah proves that faith is based on reason?

  • This guy sounds like so many fundamentalist baptist preachers I've heard.  He uses "proof texts" out of context, and asserts that they represent the rule of biblical teaching.

  • Who's "this guy," G40BikeClub?

  • faith-Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence

    Of course, if everyone makes up whatever meaning they want a word to be, the whole of language is moot.

  • Amen! I've been trying to explain this to other xtians for ages now. 1 Corinthians 2:14 says,

    "But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned".

    The Bible also refers to this topic when it discusses 'walking in the Spirit'. I think this where many even genuine xtians get confused and leads to contentions coz the 'flesh' doesn't want to accept it-far easier to be religious!

  • your a tard

    his only son that was promised by God. NOT HIS ONLY SON

  • What?

  • wow, mate, LOL, im a 'believer' as u call it and i must say, u have actualy taught doctrine in this video i actualy agree with. REVELATION, its the ticket baby.

    its funny how so much of christiany claims we dont need any more revelation today- the bible is enough. no more prophets- they are in the past. we can come to the truth by studing the bible cause its perfect.

  • Well, I'm glad you found some stuff you could agree with, Oakfire12. Thanks for taking the time to comment.

  • Reason Gen 41:31 And the plenty shall not be known in the land by reason of that famine following; for it shall be very grievous. Mt 16:8 Which when Jesus perceived, he said unto them, O ye of little faith, why reason ye among yourselves, because ye have brought no bread?

  • Bravo, sir! If reason worked hand in hand with faith, Martin Luther wouldn't have waged war on it, calling reason the "clever whore" and claiming that if one wants to be a Christian "he should want to claw the eyes out of reason."

  • Can I like, have some of your pocket lint??? I can't even believe how good this video is....in point of fact, it was exactly this style of trying to base faith on reason which destroyed my "faith" (so-called). If my teachers hadn't claimed that their faith was provable by reason, I might well still be a theist with genuine faith.

  • It's interesting you say that. I grew up Catholic, which, as I noted in the video, sees faith and reason as working hand-in-hand. Well, once reason started to pull her hand out of faith's, the whole thing began to collapse for me, too. Thanks very much for the very nice words, Randy.

  • Man, excellent videos dude! Keep it up!! 5/5 for all your shit!

  • Hey,thanks *very* much.

  • I find is curious that there are millions of people who dismiss the claim that Mohammed was visited by the archangel Gabriel, that Joseph Smith was visited by Moroni, and that the Blessed Virgin appeared before 3 brats in the village of Fatima, will readily accept the claim that a fanatic was blinded by a light, on the road to Damascus, and was administered by God. Does this story have any more credibility than the others?

  • You raise one of the most difficult questions for theists.

  • Perhaps you missed the word evidence

  • Hmm? Perhaps you could explain what you mean.

  • Intersting argument, and I got a little chuckle at the "Don't try this at home!" sign during what wold be the sacrifice.

  • lol Yeah, I thought that was funny, too, which is why I used that picture. I'm glad someone else caught it. Thanks re the argument.

  • Christians seem to like to ping on Josephus, which is an interpolation. It has been proven unreliable. Then they mention Tacitus. Both have been proven unreliable by scholars and in this regard a Christian who claims that is a miracle is cutting their nose off to spite their face and it is far from an advantage for them to do so.

  • Parts of Josephus have been shown (not proven...I'm surprise you use such a word considering in this field it is near impossible to prove something as they are ancient texts)to be dubious but not all of it.

  • The fact that THERE is even extra-biblical references is itself a miracle. Since everything Christ did marginalized him in the Roman empire. He was born in an obscure part of the roman world (Nazareth, Judea). he was lower class (a carpenter) He was not famous like a King Herod. He died in the context of a criminal (crucifixion)

  • extrabiblical sources report Jesus death e.g. Tacitus, and his existence e.g. Josephus. even if these two historians lived after Jesus' time. It can be argued that what they reported was facts, for instance, Jewish scholarship hold no contest to the fact that 'Rabban' Gamaliel I existed as mentioned in the Book of Acts, but both these historians make no mention of Gamaliel

  • Josephus was a practicing Jew... Quite possibly a Pharisee. Why would he admit that Jesus is the messiah? There has been much speculation over his mention of Jesus in his antiquities. it is quite possible that this writing was forged after his death. It wasn't even written in his writing style. There is also speculation over Tacitus' writings, but I havn't done enough research to comment about that.

  • The Josephus passage that you refer to was somehow unnoticed by early church father Origen. He had access to Josephus' writings but all he noted was that he did not mention Jesus Christ. And then suddenly, a few centuries and a few interpolations later, the Josephus reference of Jesus was "discovered". Amazing! It must have been a miracle where God wrote it for Josephus.

  • ppl being raised in the bible, died again like Lazarus. Claims of Roman emperors rising again, have ulterior motives behind them e.g. image-beautification, money, political reasons. The disciples have everything to lose if they reported the resurrection e.g. their community will shun them for being crazy, the religious authorities will persecute them.

  • Don't make me send the two of you to your rooms.

    Good grief, I've become my mother. ;-)

  • She started it!!! Haha sorry I just had to....

  • this should be good

  • The disciples..when looking at the gospels is a real problem. No one knows who wrote the gospels and this creates even more of a conundrum. Just not the kind of evidence you want. Eye witness are even a problem in the bible. Imagine if our court systems believed without evidence?

  • Hebrews tells it like it is. Throw out your critical thinking and just add wishful thinking instead. Paul never saw a living Jesus ..he talks from a spiritual point of view. Let us go outside the bible and find whether Jesus existed at all. There is little evidence to support that belief system no matter how much faith they have. Many people were raised from the dead in the bible. Roman emperors were considered to have risen from the dead. Now what? It becomes meaningless.

  • Your understanding of the Hebrews passage is mistaken. I will show you when I make my response vid. Lack of sight cannot be equated as wishful thinking unless you project that preconceived notion onto the passage. As for the lack of evidence for Jesus' existence...this is simply false...look at my historicity of Jesus vids (3 of them I think).

  • Veritas48 I don't care about what you think. You idea of lack of insight is not important to me. I won't get into semantics with you. Find someone else to discuss this with.

  • I see. So basically you don't care about the opposing position, just those who agree with you. ironic considering the charge you are leveling at Christianity. You should care what I think because dialog helps us discover truth. I listened to your position, at least give em the respect to acknowledge mine. I had no intention of arguing semantics, rather why your understanding of Hebrews is incorrect.

  • Veritas48, no I don't care about Christian diatribe. I used to be a Christian and I am insisting you go outside the bible and you cannot.

  • Rhonda. Calm down for a minute and listen to what I am saying. I have made videos of where I do nothing but go outside of the bible. You arent even willing to listen to the responses to your arguments. Whether you were a Christian or not is irrelevant. You made a claim, I responded, and you say you "dont care" about my response.

  • veritas48, let this be clear to you and straight and to the point. Why do you think I am not calm? If anything when Christians do this I find it very boring. I won't be replying to you any further. Your points have been disproven you didn't make any valid claims. You can't prove god exists and your bible holds no authority. I won't be going any further with it. :)

  • Oh I see...so its one of those "you're wrong, I'm right" arguments, even though you cannot give one ounce of evidence for your claim and simply attack me and not my view. That is a very dishonest response. Have fun running away from someone who simply wanted to defend a position contrary to yours. Next time learn to listen to those who disagree with you. This isn't 1941 Poland.

  • I am not asking for you to "care" about my response... just to have the decency to actually listen to me before you go off on a tirade....which is seemingly out of your grasp it seems.

  • It is academically dishonest to state your position and shut up any dialog with those who disagree with you. Learn to listen to other peoples reasonings instead of "not caring what they think". It makes it seem like you are in your own little box and God forbid if someone challenge it.

  • Veritas48 you like to use the word dishonesty because your main goal is to make atheists or non-believers look bad and you know it. But I am anything but dishonest. You are the one who lives a lie.

  • "Veritas48 you like to use the word dishonesty because your main goal is to make atheists or non-believers look bad and you know it."

    Thank you for telling me what my goal is. I am glad you, who knows nothing about me, was able to clarify my personal goals so all these people could see it.

  • Here is a suggestion, stop attacking me and actually listen to my reasoning. Calm down and actually listen to what i have to say. It makes you look really bad when throw out these ad hominems attacks regarding my personal motivations when you haven't even given my position the light of day. Learn to listen to those who disagree with you, not attack them

  • I must say, eliciting this kind of response from a college administrator and professor is an honor to me. I hope that my response is adequate as I seem to have attracted someone far more knowledgeable than me lol. That beings said, I can think of about 3094873 problems with your response so I will give it my best shot ;)

  • Oh, now, it's clear that you're quite bright. I mean, you claim to have found 3,094,873 problems with my response. Even my own highly self-critical eye could only find 3,094,871. So you're two ahead of me already. ;-) Seriously though, I thought your video was among the most well-conceived on the topic of faith and reason from a theistic perspective.

  • HAHA...eying that many problems in your own video makes your self-criticalness borderline abusive....then I again...I found more. I will try and make a response within the next couple of days.

  • Lots pf problems and misunderstandings in your video. Good stuff all in all but many errors. I will try and clarify as best I can in an upcoming video.

  • OK. I look forward to seeing it.

  • "Faith is the great cop-out, the great excuse to evade the need to think and evaluate evidence. Faith is belief in spite of, even perhaps because of, the lack of evidence."...Richard Dawkins

  • Dawkins is simply mistaken. At least when it comes to biblical faith. I gave an entire video showing why so re-asserting a quote from somebody like Richard Dawkins isn't exactly an argument. His statement is a mere assertion.

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more