Enjoy this delusion and when you die and instead of floating up to this "heaven" place, you'll just rot in the ground. You won't be able to see that you were wrong and what you helped do as far as demonizing science and skepticism was deplorable, reprehensible and disgusting. All of this from a cult that supposedly teaches morality? You couldn't get any more immoral. Enjoy the delusion.
Spreading ignorance like this is pathetic, you should be ashamed for trying to pass this misinformation as being credible in any way. It sucks that you are blinded by the cult you belong to and find it necessary to go around spreading these imbecilic attempts at finding a way to deny the fact that man was not created and in fact evolved and developed gradually over time. Your religious views about the beginning of man are false and your inability to accept this has made you delusional.
Taking into account the arguments of Craig, Hovind, Dawkins, and Hitchens, I think that the only rule that will get you to the truth in any age of history is to first find the people that enthrone themselves and make use of zingers to get the audience on their side. Second, you find the logical, good people opposed to this first group, and do what they say. Considering that nobody has disproven God's existence, if He is there, will Dawkins' and Hitchens' thrones be there on Judgement Day?
It seems that Craig simply pulls together a number of theistic arguments which have been around for hundreds of years, as does Dawkins for Atheism. Keep in mind that most of the world does not know or care who they are. Dawkins can get purple in the face all he wants as the world goes on its merry way without him.
Again, Craig has been shown to be demonstrably wrong in all of his argumentation and it's made clear that he doesn't care. So Dawkins debating him would only give Craig and his pseudo-intellect more publicity.
Enjoy this delusion and when you die and instead of floating up to this "heaven" place, you'll just rot in the ground. You won't be able to see that you were wrong and what you helped do as far as demonizing science and skepticism was deplorable, reprehensible and disgusting. All of this from a cult that supposedly teaches morality? You couldn't get any more immoral. Enjoy the delusion.
cr4ckb4by 3 weeks ago
Spreading ignorance like this is pathetic, you should be ashamed for trying to pass this misinformation as being credible in any way. It sucks that you are blinded by the cult you belong to and find it necessary to go around spreading these imbecilic attempts at finding a way to deny the fact that man was not created and in fact evolved and developed gradually over time. Your religious views about the beginning of man are false and your inability to accept this has made you delusional.
cr4ckb4by 3 weeks ago
Taking into account the arguments of Craig, Hovind, Dawkins, and Hitchens, I think that the only rule that will get you to the truth in any age of history is to first find the people that enthrone themselves and make use of zingers to get the audience on their side. Second, you find the logical, good people opposed to this first group, and do what they say. Considering that nobody has disproven God's existence, if He is there, will Dawkins' and Hitchens' thrones be there on Judgement Day?
rightorpride 2 months ago
It seems that Craig simply pulls together a number of theistic arguments which have been around for hundreds of years, as does Dawkins for Atheism. Keep in mind that most of the world does not know or care who they are. Dawkins can get purple in the face all he wants as the world goes on its merry way without him.
Entropy56 4 months ago
I think Craigs only makes a plausible casefor a Deistic god
LogicalThinker667 5 months ago
@bigspliffs Nah I'm good
TheScienceFoundation 6 months ago
@TheScienceFoundation Chill tha f**k out and sit down already!
bigspliffs 6 months ago
I would again like to point out the hypocrisy of a channel calling anyone a coward that censors nearly all their videos.
TheScienceFoundation 6 months ago
Again, Craig has been shown to be demonstrably wrong in all of his argumentation and it's made clear that he doesn't care. So Dawkins debating him would only give Craig and his pseudo-intellect more publicity.
TheScienceFoundation 6 months ago
Dawkins is a putz.
KnightOwl2006 6 months ago