"Born Again" but "Lost Again" - The Atheist Experience 443

"Born Again" Christians are some of the most annoying religious people in the world. Most of them have a one-track mind with a one-way ticket to Jesus. "Jesus this", "Jesus that", and you will burn in hell if you don't love him for loving you. Anthony is no different.

Anthony cannot stop confusing/mixing definitions, even after Matt tells him he is doing it. Is it "right or wrong?" and, who is "right or wrong" describing something as morally "good or bad" is fine. His error is made by thinking one side MUST be "right(correct) OR wrong(incorrect)" If that is the case, and for sake of argument let's just say it is, then a person can be "right(good) AND wrong(incorrect)" or "right(correct) AND wrong(bad)" at the same time. So of course he doesn't understand why the hosts will not give him the straight answer he is looking for, he is confusing himself.

If you ever get into a conversation with someone who proclaims to be "born again" just walk away.

Matt Dillahunty and Tracie Harris host this clip from The Atheist Experience #443 - http://www.atheist-experience.com

The Atheist Experience is produced by the Atheist Community of Austin. The ACA is a non-profit organization, promoting positive atheism and the separation of church and state. If you would like to make a donation please do so at http://www.atheist-community.org/donate/

To Watch the live internet stream:
Every Sunday at 4:30pm CST / 2:30pm PDT / 5:30pm EDT / 9:30pm GMT
http://www.ustream.tv/channel/the-atheist-experience

To watch full archived episodes:
http://www.atheist-experience.com/archive/
http://atheistexperience.blip.tv/

eNJOY!

Licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NC-SA 3.0
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/

Category:

Nonprofits & Activism

Tags:

• Atheist
• Experience
• 443
• alien
• islam
• Bible
• crazy
• Allah
• Jesus
• God
• logic
• religion
• gay
• supernatural
• evil
• moral
• talk
• discussion
• science
• intelligent
• design
• caller
• heaven
• evolution
• creation
• theory
• conspiracy
• evidence
• skeptic
• muslim
• Jewish
• Christian
• Evangelical
• America
• church
• Matt
• Dillahunty
• Tracie
• Harris

[matias2309]

Trying to use logic against a religious zealot...fail.

[Metal1998]

Man this guy is very anoying

[kathryn0200]

This caller tried and failed to get these two to answer a question the way the he wanted. Additionally, I feel that christians, which call this program, are threatened by it's cause and influence. Seems to me that if their christian god was so absolute then there wouldn't be a need to call this program. All these callers I listened to, I hear panic and fear from them. 

[FemaleUnknownUser]

@tbennett450 I'll answer in a private message. The sign limit here is too annoying.

[PenthouseDiaries]

@Meskiagkasher you're right. i can tell he's white just by listening to his voice

[tbennett450]

@FemaleUnknownUser Exactly, but there is something wrong with that isn't there? It shouldn't take a consensus to conclude that slavery is wrong, otherwise it's just arbitrary. If 51% of the population suddenly decided that slavery was acceptable then you would have to agree that it is moral, which is clearly not the case. Slavery is not moral in any way, and we can say that scientifically and unquestionably, regardless of other peoples views

[FemaleUnknownUser]

@tbennett450 That's the point: things can only be considered moral or immoral if you compare them to certain moral standards. If your moral standards are such that slavery is ok by them, then from your point of view, slavery is moral. Someone else with a more individualistc, pathocentristic morality would be equally correct in considering it immoral. This relativity is why people in biblical times didn't think of slavery as immoral - according to their morality, it simply wasn't.

[tbennett450]

@FemaleUnknownUser yeah but if a lot of people agreed on slavery being acceptable then it would be moral by that logic. What I am saying is we can objectively view certain things as immoral because of their effect on well-being. When you accept that morality is based on well-being then it stops being relative - though of course we may not always know exactly what the effects would be, we usually have a good idea

[tbennett450]

@Ematched I mean it should not be viewed as relative because it is not relative

[FemaleUnknownUser]

@tbennett450 Hmm... that depends on what you mean by "nothing". If there is a basis for morality that a lot of people can agree on, e. g. that it's bad to kill other people, they have the necessary strength to enforce this.

[Ematched]

@tbennett450 whether you think morality SHOULD or SHOULD NOT be relative is irrelevant to whether or not it is.

[tbennett450]

@FemaleUnknownUser yeah I know that, you are missing my point. What I'm saying is if morality is relative then there is nothing you can say against it. But I don't think morality should be relative.