revenant: one that returns after death Denoting “one that returns after death or a long absence,” revenant is a borrowing from French that was originally formed from the present participle of the verb revenir ("to return"). It literally means “one coming back,” either from another place or from the dead.
The fish were obviously a statement by Oannes, who has been feeling neglected for the last few thousand years, and nothing at all to do with temperature differentials causing wind! :)
Raining fish. What, besides a deity (or a hurricane or tornado) could explain fish being grabbed outta water one place and fall onto land another place?
23:00 "i don't believe in jesus and all that". lol. "how many gods are there?" "i dunno, uh, four?" "i think god could be a different category" "nah, you're kiddin, right?" hahahahahahha.
26:00 it doesn't EVER matter what i believe, what matters is that whatever YOU believe is true. if you have trouble explaining that what you believe has some merit, then you're in trouble even if what you believe is the truth.
38:22 gawd these folks think they are deep. i say this a LOT, but i left school at 16 in 1970, i went to a state comprehensive school in the UK - basically a school where kids who got expelled - kicked out - of other schools got sent to. but we had some remarkable teachers, some sadistic bastards, some religist twats, some english and art teachers who set us up for life. and i what i learned is that i can talk about stuff on any level i want, i can be a foul-mouthed construction worker (cos i have been) or a poncy artist (cos i am) and people like this guy just want to feel intellectual, but have nothing to back it up with.
1:07:00 well, let's face it, when it comes to morals, NO ONE uses morality as a guide - EVERYONE uses law. if you break a law, a human law, people don't scratch their heads and ask "was it moral" they ask, "was it legal" and EVERY case is tried on it's merits, whether it goes to arbitration and it's decided "out of court" or by the high court - a body of people look at the evidence and decide - between them - what the verdict and sentence should be - ONLY GOD kills people, burns them alive for eternity, without a trial, without representation, without a jury. god is not an arbiter of morality - or law - he is a dictator. EVERYBODY on the planet was accused, judged and executed for "sin" - we have NO IDEA what that sin was. god is a criminal.
35:00 well by the same token, why doesn't he un-alive himself, cos he will go to heaven, no? or at least he will be judged and if he is a good person he will go to heaven? as an atheist this life is all i have, i;'m not going to die just to make this guy happy. you don';t un-alive yourself because it's your nature to want to alive - whether it's god or atheism.
WTF? Why did Danny get banned? Danny, do you know why you got banned? I'm so confused as to why you keep getting banned. Can you shed more light on this to help me and others understand why you keep getting banned?
A lot of Tik-Tok creators are being banned for "spreading misinformation." I believe in this particular case it was because Danny was reported by an upset interlocketer for his "Prove God exists. Win 1,000,000,000" heading.
@maverichi7021 I believe it was for the heading he has in this video. "Falsely advertising" $1,000,000,000 prize. Some people have it worse and are being banned for "spreading misinformation," like Planet Peterson, when they are just trying to make video debunking common misconceptions through debate. It's now more important than ever for creators to have support outside of the YT/TikTok platform. Cheers!
I wonder if you ask because you WANT to be convinced? I think that's why I want to hear others' reasoning and testimony. Maybe they hold the key that apologists and religious leaders don't. Maybe no one has the correct answer. I clicked on this wanting to hear what the arguments were and was generally disappointed. So I'll keep looking. But when I come across this kind of content I'm left to wonder what the motivations of the hosts are.
The dude at 35:30 has no clue what he is talking about. You can not get the notion of a creator from the observation of nature, under the concept he is invoking. Everything humanity has observed isnt a creation, its a rearrangement of matter, under his concept of creation.
