Aren't believers contradicting the bible when they say that we have no justification for trusting logic and reason without believing in God? Romans 1:20 says, "For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities - His eternal power and divine nature - have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse." To deduce God from what we see, we need to trust our ability to reason. The believers claim that we can't justify doing this because we don't already believe in God. But Romans 1:20 says that we can. Which of them is wrong?
How can humans possibly capture the intent of a supernatural entity in the words of a book, which itself is prone to error just in translation from one language to another not to mention the inherent bias of humans? How can any scripture be seen as properly capturing the intent, behavior, or "words" of something we cannot fully understand. It seems wild to quote from a "whisper down the lane" type book and base your behavior on its words. I see no proof for a god and I see these religious texts as being an inherently flawed starting point. I'm also not a religious scholar, so I accept I may be ill informed here. I also don't chastise those who find inspiration and meaning from these books. It's the search for truth that leads me to feel they are a dead end.
You were shaking with fear while trying to run like a scared child because you didn’t know what you were getting yourself in to. You lost handedly in the first round and decided you had to run away and tried to take a jab at Andrew Wilson before getting out of there with your tail tucked between your legs. It was hilarious to see how shaky and terrified you were.
These people do not understand what logic is and evidence just doesn't interest them, when it comes to their magic-fairy-sky- god. Atheists will never be safe from the fanaticism in inanity of these cultists until we have our own country.
@@SansDeity For know "GOD Said Evidence of GOD is of All things we see & know that exist for shall be NO excuse for anyone". This means I do not need to prove anything to you it's about YOU & GOD now boy.
Because FOR KNOW 1ST (TO LOVE GOD IS TO LOVE & FOLLOW HIS WORD JESUS IN THE BIBLE AS YOUR EXAMPLE). THIS means NOT TO FOLLOW what Christianity & Atheists think, DO or say for know All Atheists shall GO TO HELL REGARDLESS.
"Religion poison everything" - Christopher Hitchens aka a butt hurt atheist. Umm, I'm afraid not Hitch but you poisoned yourself with booze and cigarettes and put yourself into an early grave. I know religious people who are in their 80's and still going strong and still enjoying life. "Then there are the fanatical atheists whose intolerance is of the same kind as the intolerance of the religious fanatics and comes from the same source. They are like slaves who are still feeling the weight of their chains which they have thrown off after hard struggle" -Albert Einstein Dan Barker who is also a butt hurt atheist said that he threw the bath water out and found that there was no baby. Yet another outspoken atheist who can't see the forest because the trees get in the way. “I was barked at by numerous dogs who are earning their food guarding ignorance and superstition for the benefit of those who profit from it. Then there are the fanatical atheists whose intolerance is of the same kind as the intolerance of the religious fanatics and comes from the same source. They are like slaves who are still feeling the weight of their chains which they have thrown off after hard struggle. They are creatures who-in their grudge against the traditional "opium of the people"-cannot hear the music of the spheres. The Wonder of nature does not become smaller because one cannot measure it by the standards of human morals and human aims.” -Albert Einstein.
You know what’s so sad is apparently God is everywhere right? He knows all your thoughts. So apparently during my deconstruction process, when I asked God for any help through the process of doubt - God was just staring at me watching me struggle but did nothing. No amount of prayer got him to help me. When a Christian girl is getting raped and calls on the name of Jesus, God is apparently hanging out in the corner watching it and unable to act. Yet God will go out of his way to turn Moses stick into a snake to prove that his dick is bigger than the Pharaoh’s God.
Seems to me that if they can't "flap their arms and fly with christ," then they can NOT do "all things through christ," regardless of their nonsense excuse since their initial declaration has no "but only if god wants to" clause. But that's just me, maybe. 🤔
I'm extremely grateful for you and your ideas, Matt. Thank you for everything. I don't know how you carry on when people are so constantly dense they can't even properly understand the points you argue for, either out of dishonesty or ignorance
I'm now competing for your new video...yes, I will (partially) reconcile God with free will. First important point: It is sure that God MADE HIS DECISIONS: nothing, no one else has the right to make them in his place. But... 1. the ONLY REASON of an action of deciding is that you do NOT KNOW the outcome of the decision beforehand, this is why you decide! If you already know the outset of the decision, then you do NOT need to decide! But you know that God made his decisions, in other words it means that God - before making his decisions - was NOT OMNISCIENT! 2. When God is omniscient - i.e. He perfectly knows the ONLY FUTURE THAT WILL ACTUALLY COME TRUE - then He loses his free will because that ONE future MUST then come true, else it means God made mistakes in his foreknowledge of the future. But God doesn't make mistakes. Thus, to sum up in this case God has NO FREE WILL any longer. In other words 1. freedom of deciding and 2. knowledge of the ACTUAL future are MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE. Either you are free of deciding and you do not know the future (the future depends on the outcome of your present decision), or you know the future but you aren't free to make any decision any longer because that ONE future MUST come true. From what above you can simply see that God went from the first phase 1 to reach the second phase 2. When entering the second phase 2. EVERYTHING WAS ALREADY ACCOMPLISHED: God was happy with all his decisions, the future was known to Him, just needed to come true. Moreover his PRESENCE WAS NOT NECESSARY any longer since his power ALONE was able to carry on all God's actions embedded in that WRITTEN future! When was the phase 1. completed? BEFORE THE START OF THE UNIVERSE. When the universe started God already made everything, this is why Jesus says ("the world has not known you"). Indeed Jesus states that nobody saw, nor knew God. How could God work on his decisions before the start of the universe? God was into a weird divine temporal dimension PEERING INTO HIS FUTURE, reaching and interacting with people of that future. This means that God is able to reach to us, now, from that remote past. In other words NOW our present God-Interlocutor is in that remote past. From our point of view we are able to modify the future with our actions, from God's perpective on the contrary the future is already set in stone, He already made everything. Our relationship with God is thus TEMPORALLY DEPHASED: God already had all his relationships with us before, we have those same relationships now instead. Thus, no real-time relationship with God exists. God is not here now, yet He is present with his words and actions. Since NOBODY is here, yet God is VIRTUALLY here, you say that "God is a spirit".
Since Ephesians is now understood to be pseudepigrapha, written in Paul's name by a later author strongly influenced by Paul's thoughts, we can see that this forger author forgot to state that when christians put on their armor of God they need to make sure that its properly ironed.
Put on the armor of God refers to one having the word of God being used as a way to deflect the thoughts of sinful desires and actions and not allowing them to rule over you.
@@davidrexford586 Hello David, yes I am aware of this new testament metaphor of armor. A metaphor found to be created by an anonymous forger according to certain scholars. Regardless of that though, in reference to the main verse discussed in the video, my OP uses a pun to point out a definite chink in this armor. Being that the Bible God shows a clear weakness involving the material of Iron.
Mike has proved that he is psychologically attached to his beliefs being objective, factual history. He, as many theists, are not arguing for an advancement in dialogue and understanding, but solely to perpetuate his own subjective religious convictions.
I remember pope saying this before stepping down, like wow you're supposed to be the direct dial to 'god' and you are resigning due to ill health and not enough strength... ok.
re - biblical characters of God vs Jesus I think that the 1st commandment PERFECTLY outlines this distinction: "I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. You shall have no other gods before Me." Since no one was singing praises to Jesus while the Jews were Exodus-ing, then this appears to be a clear injunction to worship ONLY "God" and NOT to worship Jesus. Additionally, this would condemn Jesus 100% as a False Prophet, since the biblical definition of a False Prophet is _"Anyone who draws worship away from the Lord, thy God."_
But why are so many atheists on YT pro-trans? Being atheist doesnt mean you have to blindly bow to establishment beliefs, propaganda and "The Science".
Nb: Depending on the time, the 'Children of Israel' couldn't have been in/ around the land of 'Israeli,' since it was inhabited by either Egypt or the Hittites throughout antiquity. After the fall of the Hittites, during the Bronze Age Collapse, the region was empty for perhaps a century, until the Assyrians made the region their home; The same Assyrians who were known as the finest fighting force of the ancient world. Once their time had elapsed, the region was conquered by the Babylonians/ Persians and then by the Greeks. Here's the thing: If 'The Children of Israel' had done to the Greeks/ Persians/ Assyrians/ Egyptians/ etc... the things that the Bible describes them doing to the tribes in that region, the Israelites would have been utterly crushed by the full might of Greece/ Persia/ etc... However, after the death of Alexander the Mediocre, is the ONLY time period where the Israelites might have done these things and NOT invite annihilation upon themselves in response. And so, I can't help but feel that the Israelites did not EVER inhabit the levant, until around 320 BC but ABSOLUTELY no earlier! Those Jews who were released from Babylonian captivity in ~ 600 BC... Sure, they might have inhabited the levant. But NOT in the way the bible describes! I suspect that THOSE Jews would have had small settlements and kept mostly to themselves, while making war on no one. Until around 320 BC, that is!
"... all the things that God will allow/ that's in God's plans." I see, so God is going to fuck with my Free Will? He's going to rob me of my agency because it interferes with his 'Plan?' So we only have Free Will when it's convenient for God to allow us to have Free Will, in that moment? Nb: That's my response to a hypothetical Christian who made the aforementioned objection. Regardless of my own thoughts on free will, the Christian who would bring up such an objection would almost certainly believe that we have free will and so I feel that the retort is valid.
I mean. It would be consistent if god's plan would consider defeating chariots of iron as something that "doesn't strenghten me". I can't imagine how, but that could be explanation 😂🤣 Also I don't understand english so well to say for sure what it is: 1. He can only do things that strengthten him 2. He can do everything and in the result that strengthten him
Christianity is losing strength on it's own merits. Blame can't be placed upon Matt, as having closed thousands of churches in hundreds of American towns.
