This is the RU-vid channel of Bernie Dehler and shows the many Christian-atheist debates that he participates in. Bernie is a former evangelical Christian. He was raised a Roman Catholic, but after college got "born-again" and spent the next 25 years as an evangelical Christian. He left the faith in 2009.
Bernie Dehler is the author of "Modern Science and Philosophy Destroy Christian Theology" which can be purchased here: www.amazon.com/Science-Philosophy-Destroy-Christian-Theology-ebook/dp/B00P5UR5FS . There aren't many reviews for this second edition, but you can read the reviews for the first edition here: www.amazon.com/Science-Philosophy-Destroys-Christian-Theology/dp/148411213X .
Sometimes Bernie will post comments under the name "SecHummer" (usually for general comments) and sometimes under his real name (when questions directly relate to himself, etc.). Bernie has also previously published under the pen name of Truman Ardent Smith.
Bernie, still love you brother and wish we could play racquetball again (btw, this is Bob :)). I think you need to do some more research about boats and how big the waves would have been, and how stability was a key factor (even most of todays boats would have been capsized many times), also you bring up another weak point, you ask about food for everything on the Ark, but your little boat example where would you have kept the food and how would you have kept 1+ year of food dry? Also, I know you know the Bible, so why are you misrepresenting it? You know there was vegetation because of the birds that brought an olive branch back. Also you know clean and unclean animals had diff numbers (clean-7pair and unclean-1pair), the gazelle was clean there would have been 14. Cheetah was unclean there would have been only 2. I'm not a cheetah, but if I were I wouldn't chase the fast ones i'd pick an easy meal like a slow pig!
Most atheists pray when a disaster happens to them and beg to Allah. The Creator, who has infinite power, accepts their prayers and removes the disaster. The person who denies denies it again.
Kent is the one that believes that man came from rocks. The bible says that Adam was created from the dust of the ground and what is dust? Powered rocks. Checkmate, Hovind.
Slick never misses an opportunity to trot out the story of his deceased son. Why, oh why does he do this so shamelessly. Oh, and right on queue, he recounts his creepy Jesus story. And no one's Jesus story is as authentic as Slick's.
An atheist will always say that anything is possible and there is a possibility that they don’t know anything to know something you have to know anything you have to know everything to make sure it’s true who knows everything god
Almost every example the Skeptic gave at the beginning are evidence of intelligence. Lol. He should read agnostic Richard Milton's - "Shattering the Myths of Darwinism" (the portion on the Ghost in the Machine)
The kid (and whoever put him up to this) knows God exists, but is suppressing the truth in unrighteousness Romans 1:18. Everyone knows God exists, but only the Christian can justify knowledge.
Did you only have one experience? See I feel the presence of the Lord God all the time mostly at church.Here recently I’ve been doubting I’m saved and that I only feel Him Bc I’m around Spirit filled believers.
I remember the first time I encountered christian word salad. I had no idea what the hell they were doing. It was very strange and frustrating. All they do is attempt to tie you up in endless word games and semantics. I see it now as desperation.
the atheist didnt explain it right. it's presuppositional apologetics. it means that without God the belief that we exist in this reality is reduced to absurdity because of how improbable it is when you think about the complexity and accuracy of the systems in place that require intelligence order and information that can only come from information.
The presup argument is such garbage... Claiming that if you don't know everything, you can't know anything for sure, unless someone who does know everything reveals it to you is entirely fallacious. Unless you in fact know everything then you can't know that this entity who claims to know everything and reveals it to you actually knows everything. Anyone who uses the presup argument will make two claims and never even attempt to justify or back them up and they can't be trusted to argue honestly in any discussion because they assume they're right and you can't possibly be right unless you agree with them already. Eric isn't even good at making the presup argument, not that many who do make it are very good at it, they're just regurgitating Greg Bohnsen, without even understanding it very well.
Maybe this is how we shut down religious fundamentalists 🤔 (make them crawl back into the hole they crawled out of). Just have kids with critical thinking skills wreck them every time they stick their head up😉🤷♂️ "Suffer the little children" "And a child shall lead them" 😏🤣🤣
“We know things don’t become more complex over time. If they are left alone, it creates chaos.” So what’s your definition of chaos you dishonest dick? You meant to say complex instead of chaos didn’t you?
