Read the description, Sablechicken! PLEASE ANSWER ON VIDEO!

If you only do ONE THING, answer this question:


1)What do you tell someone who UNDERSTANDS the proposition that belief in Jesus is the only way to 'salvation' - but is incapable of believing that the proposition is true?



***
related to that question, but not directly asked - keep them in mind at least. A direct answer would be nice:


2)How do know that the Bible is the product of omniscience?

3)What is it about 'faith' that the Creator finds so endearing? Why not 'love', 'compassion', or 'honesty'?

***

bonus points for answering the questions that I have posted on your video here:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=JFhdlf0uSG8


just in case, here they are again:

4)As someone who is so skeptical of people's motives on YT (completely understandable!), and so offended by blasphemy, answer me this:

Is there a better way for someone to illustrate their sincerity when saying "I do not believe that this God character exists" then to blaspheme against it?


5)Did God harden the Pharaoh's heart?

6)How are YOU affected by someone else blaspheming?

7)The extent of my interaction with the Hovind crime family was filing the paperwork to counter the fraudulent DMCA claim they filed against me (felony!).

I haven't decided to sue them. Is that neighborly enough?

8)What is more important to you?

a) Discovering and sharing with others what is real, true, and factual

b) Defending and sticking to the ideas and opinions you came here with

9)Is there ANYTHING that could IN PRINCIPLE convince you that your beliefs about your religion are false?

a) Yes, I am always taking new information into account. To be open-minded is to admit that I might be wrong.

b) No! NOTHING can ever convince me that I am wrong. I am close-minded.


Sablechicken, my hypothesis is that you are interested in nothing more than raising a stink, then running away when confronted with legitimate questions or criticism.

The BEST WAY for you to disprove my hypothesis would be to directly answer all nine questions on video.

I feel like I've been more than fair.

thanks!

:)


the books:

Big Bang - Simon Singh
A Brief History of Time - Stephen Hawking
The Origin of Species - Charles Darwin
The Selfish Gene - Richard Dawkins
Guns, Germs, and Steel - Jared Diamond
Breaking the Spell - Daniel Dennett


"I'd like to recommend two other books.

'The Language Instinct' by Stephen Pinker.

'Conciousness Explained' by Daniel C. Dennett

Conciousness and language tend to be two areas where theists feel the need to add God, in addition to creation itself. The above books offer elegant natural explanations for both. Although they don't offer full explanations(the brain has not been fully understood yet after all) it is clear that a God or soul is not a key component in any of them."

-olavka

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

• sablechicken
• sable
• chicken
• rabid
• simon
• singh
• stephen
• hawking
• charles
• darwin
• richard
• dawkins
• jared
• diamond
• daniel
• dennet

[HarmIessPerv]

Ugly atheist.

[RabidApe]

whatever you say, Sparky

[themightycelestial]

Hey, I just finished watchin' this vid. Good stuff. I notice that this video, you did a great job of explaining how the other person can step into your shoes. Sounds like your trying to keep a balance perspective. Do you have any vids of you stepping into their shoes? ( I sorta feel like I'm missing something, & am very interested on your take from the other side's "shoes").

Once again, great stuff.

[RabidApe]

watch?v=j6u-kJSCuSk

glad you're enjoying yourself!

[nochartmozart]

I am a christian. I must say I really enjoyed this video! I have watched about 20 of your vids as well, and I appreciate your civil tact and methodical approach. You state your position intelligently, as opposed to other atheists who simply throw vile emotional tantrums toward christians.

I'd like to see you and Ravi Zacharias have an open debate covering this very topic. That would be some stimulating entertainment!

[BNnoddy]

God created this mess? if a god made the world and people he/she is a giant douche.

[blazereef]

@cierrasme im atheist and im not really religious but i guess you could say i get that spiritual feeling from things like looking at the stars and stuff but yeh, if religion didnt cause so much trouble, i would care less about it

[cierrasme]

@blazereef i agree. I look at it as an Mathmatical equeation where some people find logic and others cannot grasp. People get so fussy about someone accepting Christ and others who have not have that spiritual connection. Im not sure if your religious but i like your statement. Belief is not a choice and we are not the judge. Christians are supposed to testify not condem and vice versa ahiest can accept that they do not believe but do not judge

[bocckoka]

Tibor Gánti made a pretty good model on how life could have begun, it's called the chemoton model.

[shrikechan]

Fuck, look at all the dislikes. More idiots who can`t stand to see one of their fellow idiots and their weak-ass arguments being challenged. This is why rating systems are stupid, people just abuse them.

[blazereef]

beleif is not a choice, EVER.

[TheSoSoAgnostic]

My one question would be, "Make an argument for the existence of god that doesn't boil down to, "You should believe this because I do."

[nagchampafreak]

wohhooo 42-42-42!! i made it till the end and this is only the second vid ive watched by RabidApe. **patting self on back** haha. very good ideas here. gettin some of the books mentioned tomorrow. subscribing and looking forward to more vids. thanks for not yelling lol

[pirbird14]

Most of us don't encounter seasoned apologists. Most of us encounter friends and family who wish to "win us for Christ". When we respond with reasoned objections, they attack our "pride", or try to terrorize us with visions of hell. We see these same tactics used by televangelists. Even the liberal preachers of my childhood wove lesser versions of these arguments into their sermons.

Their job, as they see it, is to break our "pride".

[pirbird14]

In the cases I'm discussing, the apologist is using emotional manipulation, either as a substitute for logic or as a main buttress to weak logic. Whether we are trained in logic or not, we know that the apologist is wrong - both morally and logically - in resorting to such tactics. Often, the apologist is telling us things about our feelings that just don't match what we actually feel. We can't haul out our feelings and measure them as we would a yard of cloth, so we laugh at them or get angry.