Ray Comfort Interview - The Atheist Experience #702 (full episode)

Matt Dillahunty and Russell Glasser with guest Ray Comfort. Interview with Ray Comfort. Matt and Russell have a conversation "across the divide" with professional apologist Ray Comfort.

The Atheist Experience #702 from March 27, 2011, with Matt Dillahunty and Russell Glasser. This entire episode (topic: "Interview with Ray Comfort") is archived on Blip.tv.
► http://blip.tv/file/4943508

You can read more about and comment on this show on the Atheist Experience blog:
► http://atheistexperience.blogspot.com...

In January 2012 this episode was featured on Top Documentary Films, a highly recommended blog that features a large collection of documentaries from all over the Internet. You can also comment on this episode there:
► http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/atheis...


WHAT IS THE ATHEIST EXPERIENCE?

The Atheist Experience is a weekly cable access television show in Austin, Texas geared at a non-atheist audience. The Atheist Experience is produced by the Atheist Community of Austin. The Atheist Community of Austin is organized as a nonprofit educational corporation to develop and support the atheist community, to provide opportunities for socializing and friendship, to promote secular viewpoints, to encourage positive atheist culture, to defend the first amendment principle of state-church separation, to oppose discrimination against atheists and to work with other organizations in pursuit of common goals.


VISIT THE ACA'S OFFICIAL WEB SITES

► http://www.atheist-community.org (The Atheist Community of Austin)
► http://www.atheist-experience.com (The Atheist Experience TV Show)

More shows and video clips can be found in the archive:
► http://www.atheist-experience.com/arc...

DVDs of the Atheist Experience can be purchased via:
► http://www.atheist-community.org/prod...


MUSIC CREDITS

Intro song: "Listen to Reason," written and performed by Bryan Steeksma.
► http://www.myspace.com/bryansteeksma
► http://www.youtube.com/bryansteeksma


NOTES

TheAtheistExperience is a fan appreciation channel on YouTube.
"The Atheist Experience" is a registered trademark of the ACA.
Creative Commons license: BY, NC, SA
► http://creativecommons.org/licenses/b...

• Category

  Nonprofits & Activism

[Tara Mier]

why would i want to make sand?

[TheCountic16]

(cont2)

The point is this: I know you don't believe in a spiritual world. But *your beliefs* do not affect the truth. *It just might actually exist*. And if it does...YOU ARE SCREWED b/c your defense was bankrupt scapegoats.*My beliefs also* do not affect the truth. Who knows who is right or wrong. But the one person who certainly does NOT know...is the one who says "well I don't believe that, so I will not listen"

THAT IS THE MOST RETARDED ANSWER IN THE WORLD.

[TheCountic16]

(cont) You don't see how that is a scapegoat? You created, out of thin air, a definition and premise for the sole purpose of trying to communicate to your debate opponent that you just do not want to listen to them. Is that not right? You just construct it to get people to leave you to your beliefs instead of prompting you to seek truth as if you may not currently have it?

It is no wonder God does not want a soul with that philosophy. It does not value itself to seek its own eternal life.

[TheCountic16]

I mean this with all seriousness, no mockery: So your reasoning is thus:

"I don't believe in a spiritual world, and I know we live in a hard determined world where I am completely unable to influence my decisions by my own conscious choice because what appears to be my desire is infact just an illusion and I can do nothing but choose my desires"?

What happens to the fallacy of that belief....if infact a spiritual world exists in which you have direct control over yourself?

[LordBLB]

"yet to give any evidence"

The fact that you missed it, means you'll never get it. One cannot combat willful ignorance.

"Theories are opinions, based on 'evidence' that can't be observed"

And that comment right there just made my assumption that you're willfully ignorant, about as concrete as I would have expected. Thanks for removing all doubt and doing the hard work for me. ;)

[istabppl420]

Best episode ever

[DGneoseeker1]

I consider only one definition to be worthy of being called free will. And that would be the ability to make two opposing decisions while having exactly the same physical state in your brain. Which is obviously impossible.

If this cannot happen then everything you think is determined by physics and thus you do not control it. It is controlled by your genes and the physical structure of your brain's neural links.

In terms of religion, damning/saving people based on this would be totally unjust.

[DGneoseeker1]

No, it is not true. If it was faith then I would believe what I believe despite all evidence to the contrary.

There IS no evidence to the contrary. I am completely open to it if and when it shows up.

I am a genetics graduate. I understand the subject matter. Thus I know that there is nothing to prevent humans evolving from primitive life forms.

There are some confusing steps, of course. Like how the first multicellular life form evolved. Doesn't mean it didn't happen.

[DGneoseeker1]

No need for anything so in depth. I'm merely asking what an angel visibly looks like according to your own supposed experience. I am curious if it in any way resembles what the Bible says they look like.

Were they humanoid, for example?

Nothing else about the experience is any use to me to know, because no matter what you saw, it could simply have been due to your beliefs and preconceptions colouring a dream or hallucination.

[DGneoseeker1]

Then why assume it didn't happen? That is what you appear to be doing.

"I have doubts about humans evolving from single celled organisms. Therefore there's an invisible man in the sky and he definitely made us. Also, I saw angels which proves me right." This is what you appear to be arguing.

Evolving has evidence. Creationism has NONE. It's a hell of a lot more of an assumption to assume "God did it" and I thought you didn't like assumptions?