Th1sWasATriumph Thinks Our Particles Existed For An Infinite Regress of Time!

Believe it or not, I did not edit one part of this video* (the best part was when he flipped out at the end). But this may be the most hilarious thing I saw since theowarner thought that invisible square circles existed. Th1sWasATriumph (who has no idea that William Lane Craig speaks of an immediate experience of God as properly basic**) openly admits that atoms and matter that make up our body has existed, will exist, and will not stop existing ever!

The dirt on Th1sWasATriumph: http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=1D45E2CA7F42783F

* - You can see it here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tHXXrFf2Zy0
** - The joke is on Th1sWasATriumph who has no training in philosophy. Philosophers speak of properly basic beliefs. And all that William Lane Craig is saying is that the immediate experience of God is properly basic:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4b7pQ3v4T2A
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYZzquUd9WQ
http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=40E96240F6CBDBBE
http://www.reasonablefaith.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=6489

Category:

Education

Tags:

• Th1sWasATriumph
• Kalam
• Cosmological
• Argument
• William
• Lane
• Craig

[ChiefRepublic]

RRG has anyone ever told you that you are very unchristian. (You are christian right?). What would Jesus think if he saw your channel man.

[rationalresponseguy]

@ChiefRepublic He'd think you're a stupid ass.

[angrydead]

@rationalresponseguy I notice you get very abusive when people confront you: is that becouse you can't defend what you believe?

[rationalresponseguy]

@angrydead No. And I think your comment is rich given your username. You're a moron.

[angrydead]

@angrydead oh plus "you're a fatty and I hate you" isnt a rational response-so much for my name being inapropriate.

[rationalresponseguy]

@angrydead You must be blind and stupid if you think theowarner isn't a lard butt.

[angrydead]

@rationalresponseguy and you're a idiot to think it's relavent.

....pathetic.

[angrydead]

@rationalresponseguy I think it's pretty clear who the moron is here...well it almost certainly isnt for you so I'll spell it out: it's you

ps: your beliefs are a joke :)

[dbes02]

Yes, it is a hilarious thing to say that "an immediate experience of God" is "properly basic". What about if we replace "God" with Mohammed or Ganesha? What if we replaced it with Mohammed's experience of being dictated the Quran, or of Joseph's Smith, or reincarnated, or abducted by aliens? Or of rising into the air when oxygen deprived? Science has excellent explanations for delusions and hallucinations. And we can see what a fraud Craig is, with his pitiful bare assertions.

[ChiefRepublic]

@rationalresponseguy I'm not the one who believes in him my friend. You have called me a stupid ass, but I still love you as brother of mankind and I will turn the other cheek.

[VeryEvilPettingZoo]

(cont)

Now that I think about it, unless he argues from quantum field theory, mass-energy conversion, etc - something I haven't heard him do - the only Kalam-relevant example of physical realities "beginning to exist" (not matter being rearranged and then named) is the Big Bang. But there his premise is unclear. Worse, it's blatantly circular, since saying the Big Bang had a cause is his conclusion! His premise's only relevant evidence is unclear and is exactly his argument's conclusion!