search results matching tag: the bible says

» channel: motorsports

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.003 seconds

    Videos (6)     Sift Talk (0)     Blogs (1)     Comments (265)   

Is the Universe an Accident?

A10anis says...

The truth is that "intellectual laziness" is purely the territory of those who believe that their "knowledge" is irrefutable because it comes from the bible. A book clearly, irrefutably, written by man to control man. Saying "the bible says" so it must be true, is the definition of lazy, brain washed thinking. I'm sorry you cannot see this, perhaps one day you will. Actually, you may get help by looking at the myriad contradictions in the bible. Of course the theologians tell us "you are misinterpreting it." Well, considering it is, allegedly, the word of god, it's pretty poor. Oh, and incidentally, I certainly have not had "plain facts" revealed to me and chosen to ignore them. Were there even one fact indicating the existence of a creator. I would be happy to acknowledge it. Sadly, for the believers, all they have is blind faith and a book of childish stories. I, on the other hand, will enjoy the only life I am sure of. I will enjoy the many things that this one life has to offer, and do my best to be a caring, thoughtful, happy individual. When my time is up, if I am proved wrong, and find myself standing before the great dictator - who wanted me to bow and prostrate myself in abject worship, I will tell him I have been a good person and if that is not enough for him then I'm sure - in his "mercy" - he will send me straight to hell.

shinyblurry said:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam%27s_razor#Science_and_the_scientific_method

"In science, Occam's Razor is used as a heuristic (rule of thumb) to guide scientists in the development of theoretical models rather than as an arbiter between published models.[8][9] In physics, parsimony was an important heuristic in the formulation of special relativity by Albert Einstein,[36][37] the development and application of the principle of least action by Pierre Louis Maupertuis and Leonhard Euler,[38] and the development of quantum mechanics by Max Planck, Werner Heisenberg and Louis de Broglie.[9][39] In chemistry, Occam's Razor is often an important heuristic when developing a model of a reaction mechanism.[40][41]"

You are pointing the finger and saying I am ignorant yet you dismiss Occams razor in ignorance of its application to the scientific method. According to the principle of parsimony I do have an argument but it appears you can't be bothered to consider what I am saying. This is an intellectual laziness which seems to typify our culture today. It is an apathetic reasoning process that sees everything through the lens of stereotypes and generalities. If I am wrong about that I will happily admit it, and you still have ample opportunity to establish otherwise.

Is the Universe an Accident?

shinyblurry says...

My argument is sound, logically, and if it were unsound it would be very easy to point out what the flaw is. I'll elaborate further:

Occams razors states that the theory with the least number of assumptions balanced against its explanatory power should be preferred to an argument with more assumptions and less explanatory power. The question is how do we explain the apparent fine-tuning in the Universe, a "goldilocks zone" for life. Scientists propose the multiverse theory which explains the favorable conditions as just being lucky, in that there are innumerable Universes and we just happen to be in the one that is very favorable for life. The problem with the theory is manifold; one, that is no observable evidence for the theory, and no way to test the theory. Two, it raises more questions than it answers because the mechanism that generates all of the Universes is even more finely tuned than the Universe itself, how did it get there, etc. It simply pushes back the problem another step. Eventually you must get to the point where a miracle occurs..ie, something came from nothing, or an eternal something which is infinitely fine tuned. According to Occams razor, the theory of an eternal Creator of the Universe should be preferred over *multiple* unobserved universes, that the fine tuning we observe isn't just apparent, but actual.

When you ask, why did God not do it "sooner", you do realize that you are making a temporal reference point? The bible says God "began" to do something because we are temporal beings and we think in terms of beginnings and endings, but we have no idea what that looks like in eternity. If your problem is simply with something being eternal, then maybe you haven't thought about the consequences of there not being anything eternal. You have to ask yourself the question, why is there something rather than nothing? You are facing two absurdities in this case; either an infinite regress of causes, or something coming from nothing. There has to be something eternal otherwise you are left with positing logically impossible outcomes. So, if there is something eternal, and whatever it is must be infinitely fine-tuned, and it ultimately created this Universe, you might as well call it God because it already possesses many of His attributes. Whichever way you turn, you are facing the Almighty.

The bible tells us why God didn't need to create light first:

Revelation 21:22 And I saw no temple in it, for the Lord God Almighty is its temple, even the Lamb.
Revelation 21:23 And the city had no need of the sun, nor of the moon, that they might shine in it, for the glory of God illuminated it, and its lamp is the Lamb.

You should ask yourself, why do you object to the possibility of a Creator? Are your arguments just excuses to cover up the plain facts that have already been revealed to you by God, and the expression of your desire not to be accountable to Him? Something to think about..

A10anis said:

I have neither the time, nor the inclination

How our society fails its men and boys -- the trailer

Lawdeedaw says...

Um no. We respect women too much. Like the bible says, "Spare the rod, spoil the woman." We let them decide things and in turn they make us into little credit cards to be disposed of....sad...

But the solution is clear. Either get rid of our ape-like concepts of manhood or crush the fuck out of this respect-for-women-and-children-and-others bullshit.

unpreterist said:

If anything we pamper our "little men" too much these days. We have so emasculated males that many have identity crisis issues. All this effeminate to even homosexual tone within society hinders the nature male need to express his masculinity.

enoch (Member Profile)

shinyblurry says...

Thank you for your gracious words. Merry Christmas to you too! Today is the day the Lord has made so I try not to dredge up the past too often, and I can tell you that I appreciate what you've said either way. I am growing in grace, and only in grace. As you said, it is a prayer for wisdom and grace alone which allows me to interpret scripture. Certainly, when I first started to pursue God, I had no earthly idea of where I would end up or what I would have to go through to get there.

What I am doing is essentially, submitting myself to God and allowing Him to remake me into the image of His Son. This is a process that is initiated, executed and completed by the Spirit of God. It is not my whim but the very real intervention of the Almighty in my life, whereupon the old me is extricated and the new me is molded by the Potters hands and seasoned with fire.

If there was anything I objected to in your words it was the implication that Christianity is like spiritual training wheels for those who can't hack it in the real world. This was simply my flesh, objecting; a spiritual pride that ironically came from my journal into the occult. I don't have that notion anymore; I have no trouble admitting that I am nothing and can do nothing without God, and that there is nothing in me which is of any value unless God put it there, and that for His glory.

I have volumes of things I wrote on esoteric spirituality, abstract thoughts, poetry, philosophy, life the universe and everything. I churned this stuff out as if my mind was a computer spitting out lines of code, I excelled at it, Enoch; as it seemed to me I was ascending the very heights of being, a kind of godhood, tapping into the very beating heart of it all. But God brought me crashing back down to the ground and He offered me a choice:

either crawl back into your darkness and reconstitute your construct or give up everything and follow My Son into the Light.

I didn't want to do it. I preferred my reality. Yet, to go back would mean to purposefully delude myself and that was what I absolutely refused to do. I was interested not in what I preferred but the truth. That's why I am a Christian.

Either way, I see that you are pursuing God, and I respect that. There is a difference in personal revelation, and we both have our opinions of that. That's fine and I think the truth can and will speak for itself. Even Buddha said, there are three things which cannot be long hidden; the sun, the moon and truth. Yet, there is something he missed which is that we can supress the truth. I could have rejected Gods revelation and reconstructed my reality, but thankfully I chose not to do that. Not everyone makes that choice. I have spoken to an atheist on this very website who denies he has a soul even though he has had an out of body experience. Sometimes people will take that rejection to their grave, which is why Christians are so urgent about letting people know about Jesus Christ. I don't know what your view is on the afterlife, but, the bible says we only have one shot and then the judgment. This is why I preach the gospel here, and everywhere. Not for myself, but because God loves these people and He wants them to know it before it is too late to do anything about it.

Thanks again for everything and I am praying you have a wonderful day tomorrow with your friends and family. I pray the Lord will give you a deeper revelation of His love. God bless you and yours.

Duck Dynasty Is Fake!

shinyblurry says...

There is some truth in what you've said. For one, the bible says that Christians are the light of the world. Our number one responsibility is not to change the culture, but to allow God to change us so that His light, the light of Jesus Christ will shine forth from our lives and touch those around us. It is the church who retreated from the culture in the preceding decades which has allowed these forces that shape our culture today to slowly encroach on it, and eventually take over. The influence of the church on the culture is minimal because Christians have not been shining their light. Instead, it has largely taken an adversarial position and been engaged in a protracted "culture war". The real business of the kingdom of God is not shaping our culture through legislation, but by showing agape love to all those who cross our path. Jesus said that our unity and love towards one another is the evidence that He was sent by the Father:

Joh 17:21 that they may all be one, just as you, Father, are in me, and I in you, that they also may be in us, so that the world may believe that you have sent me.

Likewise, our lack of love and infighting is evidence to the world that the Father did not send Jesus. Unfortunately, those who are really living for Christ do not stand out as much as those who are not. Before I knew the Lord, I didn't have any positive examples of Christians in my life. I wasn't born into religion and didn't have much exposure to the church aside from what I saw on television. Now that I have seen what is going from the inside I can say that the vast majority of the positive things that Christians do is not reported on. In my town, the churches are all working together to serve the community, despite their differences. Many have been blessed and many lives have been transformed in wonderful ways, but you'll never hear about it unless it comes by word of mouth.

So, when you say Jesus hung out with sinners, this is essentially what the church should be doing, which is not to go a building every week and shout hallelujah, but to get out there and serve your community. To form relationships with people and to meet them where they are at and what their needs may be. Yet, you couldn't really say that Jesus "hung out" with sinners. Certainly He visited with sinners and ate meals with them, because He loved them. This really bothered the pharisees who asked Jesus one day why He did that. This is what He said:

Luke 5:30 And the Pharisees and their scribes grumbled at his disciples, saying, "Why do you eat and drink with tax collectors and sinners?"
Luke 5:31 And Jesus answered them, "Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick.
Luke 5:32 I have not come to call the righteous but sinners to repentance."

Jesus hung out with sinners because He loved them, and because He loved them He was calling them to repentance. Jesus did teach about hell and the fear of God, in fact Jesus said more about hell than every person in the bible combined. Most of what we know about hell was spoken by the Lord. It is the reality of hell that led Jesus to the cross:

John 3:16 "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.

John 3:17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.

Jesus did not come to condemn, but save. He shed His innocent blood for our crimes, so that we can be forgiven and have eternal life. This is the gospel of Jesus Christ, the good news for all who are held in the bondage of sin and facing eternal separation from God.

RFlagg said:

Jesus hung out with the sinners and tax collectors and told them of the love of God, not how God is going to condemn them all to Hell. If Jesus was alive in modern day America, he'd be hanging out in San Francisco talking about the love of God, not fighting to deny them equal rights under the law.

Girl Taken from Pot Smoking Parents & Murdered by Foster Mom

chingalera says...

Oh no, you may blame Texas-Like the Bible says, "From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and from the one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked." Texas falls way short in the responsibility category....

newtboy said:

Yes, of course, just because Texas did this, don't blame Texas.

Atheist in the Bible Belt outs herself because she is MORAL

JustSaying says...

Yummy, arguing on the internet!
I haven't done this in years, I'm gonna throw my hat in the Ring now.
I spent countless hours here for years, just enjoying the show. Staying out of all this, in the end at least, unimportant chatter. I came for the videos. Then somebody starts singing about sluts and I end up with an account. What can I say? I like sluts.
I spent much time reading and skipping over the posts of @shinyblurry here. And I still wonder why people feel the need to argue with him in such detail and length. He talks a lot about his faith in God and Jesus but what it come down to is this: He believes in The Bible.
The Bible features God and Jesus and all that but most important of all, it features a heckload of arguments for all kinds of things that are often in direct conflict.
Earlier in this thread, somebody threw a Bible quote about how rape victims have to marry their rapist in @shinyblurry's face and he actually started to explain (correct me if I misunderstood) how it's a punishment for the rapist that he has to pay money and marry the woman if the father chooses that.
I have money to burn. Is Jessica Alba married and where does her dad live? She's super hot and I *need* that kind of punishment. God wants her to fulfill her marital duties, right? If she's not available, I could make a list.
Now, I could argue this IMO rather distasteful idea with him, quoting the Bible back and forth, using other philosophical sources for arguments (I'm sure Hitchens mentioned rape somewhere sometime) but all that doesn't matter.
He believes in The Bible.
If I went back in time and edited early versions to my liking to include gems like "Every man shall also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed no abomination: they shall surely be praised", old shiny here would organize gay pride parades now. Because it's in the book. Whatever is in there, it's the truth. Whatever.
It's the same reason why creationist (I have no idea if old shiny is among them) can not accept evolution. It's not in the book.
They believe in this powerful, omnipotent god, not just in I-can-command-all-sea-animals-god. No, not that Aquaman shit the Greeks had, I'm talking about I-invented-the-universe-god. Get this, this guy did *invent* the universe. And still it was all some Siegfried and Roy BS we *know* to be nonsense. 7 days? Really? Was he in a hurry? Couldn't he wait until we get to the Game of Thrones and Tivo part of History? Was there another Earth to take care of? Contract work?
The idea to credit that dude for creating Evolution itself is too much to ask for these people. The idea that God created a giant machine (the universe) and allowed it to feature other tiny, tiny machines that repair, reproduce and improve themselves (life itself; evolution), is too mindblowing.
Who's more awesome in your book? The god that can do magic or the god who could do magic but opted for inventing everything science has discovered so far?
You know, science failed to disprove the existence of god. They can't do that yet. But they can disprove The Bible, at least parts. And yet, they still side with that darn book.
They don't care about God, the don't even care about Jesus. They care about what they read about them. They care about their perception of it.
Telling @shinyblurry that Jesus was a little, brown, jewish Hippie who got mixed up with existing mythology is like telling a fourteen year old that Ed Cullen is, by his own admission, a creepy murderer who stalks underage girls 80 years his junior. They don't want to hear it because that is not what the book said. They book didn't say that god created the natural laws of physics, chemistry and biology and set them upon the universe to wreak havoc until dinosaurs showed up. The book said it took 7 days. And ribs and dirt.
The Bible says so. Nothing else matters.
That's why it's pointless to argue scripture with him. The book is everything and allows so brilliantly for circular logic and cherry picking. It worked with slavery and how many are willing to argue nowadays in front of a TV camera for it? But gays are not slaves and women can always be picked on. Some wrong ideas are easier to conceal behind a book cover than others.
The Bible is everything to him, God and Jesus are just featured players. In the end they could be replaced by Donald Duck and Batman, they just weren't around back when they started to write it.
That doesn't mean I wouldn't love to hear your thoughts about the latest Daft Punk single, @shinyblurry. Or are you more into Rock music?

How to Justify Science (Richard Dawkins)

Quboid says...

@shinyblurry, I don't care about scripture. I don't believe in it. I don't believe it was written by God, directly or through man. I believe it was written by man, alone, and has been translated, manipulated, and copied for centuries so even if it had any truth, it would be long, long gone. The scripture you quote is all about trying to fool yourself anyway. God could prove his existence in a millionth of a second, why is he so insecure that he needs to play games with us?

I used to pray, but I have never ever heard of one single prayer actually having any supernatural effect. It always comes down to confirmation bias or the placebo effect. Not once has a single prayer done a damn thing, yet people fool themselves into not only believing that it works, but that it always works.

Again, I have considered this at great length. I was Christian, I was probably baptised, I believed in God and I tried to talk to him. But I grew out of having invisible friends.

Everything, every possible set of circumstances, is "consistent with the bible", because your interpretation morphs to fit whatever reality you can't manage to pretend doesn't exist. When childish nonsense like "God works in mysterious ways" is considered a valid argument, absolutely anything will confirm your belief that the Bible says God is true and that's reliable because God says the Bible is true and that's reliable because the Bible says God is true and that's reliable because God says ...

Physicist Sean Carroll refutes supernatural beliefs

hatsix says...

Oh, the irony, a christian lecturing someone about Circular Reasoning.

Tell me again how you know your God is the "True God"?

Oh, the Bible says? And how do you know the Bible is God's Word?

Oh, the Bible says?

An awfully big problem, but thankfully Christians have a solution... they know that God exists because they've.... wait for it... EXPERIENCED him. They've sensed him in their life. Hmm... Sounds like they're relying on Empiricism themselves without even realizing it.

Unless you want to go on towards Idealism.... but how could there be so many non-believers if we're all born with so much innate knowledge of everything.

There's no application of Philosophy that will lead you towards being a christian... Also nothing that will prove the absence of God, either. Just like in hard science, whether or not there is a God is purely in the realm of Theology.

shinyblurry said:

I do know a little bit about philosophy. For instance, epiricism is theory of epistemology, which is itself a branch of philosophy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistemology

Therefore empiricism is a philosophical position within epistemology. The main problem with empiricism is called the problem of induction: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Problem_of_induction

Because empiricism relies upon inductive reasoning, it makes certain presuppositions, such as the uniformity in nature. Unfortunately, this leaves no justification for its truth claims beyond circular reasoning. For instance, if I were to say that the sun will rise tomorrow, I could only justify this by its past performances since there is no certainty the future will be like the past. Therefore, my knowledge claim says that the future will be like the past, because of the past, which is circular reasoning.

As far as great thinkers go, if the reason that you're here is to come to know God personally, and you miss it, how could you be considered a great thinker?

Louis CK - If God Came Back

RFlagg says...

I think part of it must have been cut off. Christians are the most anti-pro-environmental people around, they are the ones most defending the giant corporations fight against the science of climate change. Fox News and the Republican party say it is junk, so they say it is all junk. Which I find odd for the same reason Louis CK notes in the video, if He was real and came back, He'd be upset that they didn't take better care of the Earth. They seemed to have forgotten how good stewardship works... it wouldn't matter if climate change science was BS, taking better care of the environment would be the right thing to do from a Biblical perspective, yet many if not most don't care. I've been told, "It doesn't matter anyhow as Jesus is coming again soon"... as if that is reason enough not to be a good steward of what He apparently gave them to watch over... It just boggles my mind how far disconnected from any sort of logical thought train that the vast majority of them seem to be on... and I don't mean where it contradicts the Bible, but where logic would follow the Bible and yet is still ignored as the vast right wing media machine tells them to...

I would think that if the Bible says to be a good steward of the Earth and the right wing media machine and Republican party says profits matter more, then I'd question the Republican party and right wing media machine. I would think that if Jesus said the rich won't inherit the kingdom of God, that we were to take care of the sick and the poor and needy, and the Republican party and right wing media machine said, no, we need to let the rich keep more of the money they made by not paying their workers a living wage and punish those working for them by taking away benefits that help them survive, then I would question that message... oh wait, I did. Which is why I changed from a Republican to a Libertarian (defending Fox News and bashing evolution and the whole bit) and eventually to the Liberal I am today. Everything the right wing folks do in the so called name of God is in contradiction to the teachings of the Bible... save perhaps abortion, the solution of which isn't laws restricting it, but affordable health care and education, two things they are against providing...

Sam Harris on Going to Heaven/Hell

shinyblurry says...

Jesus loves you and I love you. This is an extremely long post and I apologize. I am writing for anyone who is interested in critically examining the arguments Sam Harris makes and contrasting it to the actual truth as presented by the scripture. Sam has distorted this truth and the entire video is basically one long strawman argument.. I think that is you are going to utterly condemn something you should at least make a cursory effort to understand it. That's just me. I invite you guys to learn more about the scripture so that you can know the truth for yourself:

http://www.amazon.com/How-Read-Bible-All-Worth/dp/0310246040/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1360718403&sr=1-2&keywords=how+to+understand+the+bible

I'll answer some points..

Sam: The point of Christianity is to safeguard the eternal well being of eternal souls

You could perhaps categorize this as the main point, but there are many points to Christianity. I don't want to split hairs here; I am agreeing with Sam essentially but I just want to expand on it a bit. The main point of Christianity is to declare the gospel of Jesus Christ. That's what Jesus said when He began His ministry: "repent and believe the gospel". The gospel is that Jesus Christ, God in the flesh, came to Earth to live as one of us. Though He did not sin, He took all of our sins upon Himself on the cross so that we could be forgiven and have eternal life. The point of Christianity is Jesus, and having a personal relationship with Him. Everyone who comes to know Jesus will be born again and become a new person. There are many other points to this but I will stop here.

Sam: 9 million children die every year

Yes, this is true but most of these children, if not all of them, will be going to Heaven. Not one of them have been forgotten by God or will suffer an unjust fate. There is an age of accountability for every person, and it is different for every person. It all depends on the revelation God has given each particular person and their response to it. It is fairly certain though that most if not all children under the age of 12 will make it to Heaven automatically.

Sam in discussing the dying children brings up the problem of evil..which has been sufficiently answered by Plantigas free will defense:

http://videosift.com/video/Since-Evil-Suffering-Exist-A-Loving-God-Cannot

Sam mentions the grief of the parents and that their unanswered prayers are part of Gods plan..

First of all, God answers every prayer, He just doesn't always answer yes. An example of a prayer God answered no to was when Jesus was in the garden of gethsemane and was asking the Father to let Him bypass the cross. Though it surely grieved His heart, He answered no to that prayer. He answered no because He was esteeming us more than Himself, which is what sacrificial love looks like. A key part of the prayer of Jesus was "never the less, not my will, but your will".

Christians do not pray to the exclusion of Gods will. we don't necessarily know what is best for us, but we trust God that He knows, and so we always pray that His will be done, even above what may seem needful for me at that time.

--------------------------------------
--------------------------------------


I will also address the grief. The fact of the matter is, the scripture makes it very clear that Christians will suffer grief and loss on a constant basis:

Matthew 24:9

Then you will be handed over to be persecuted and put to death, and you will be hated by all nations because of me.

1 Peter 4:12 Beloved, think it not strange concerning the fiery trial which is to try you, as though some strange thing happened to you:

1 Peter 4:16 Yet if any man suffer as a Christian, let him not be ashamed; but let him glorify God on this behalf.


--------------------------------------
--------------------------------------


Look at Pauls testimony:

1 Corinthians 11:24-28

Are they servants of Christ? (I am out of my mind to talk like this.) I am more. I have worked much harder, been in prison more frequently, been flogged more severely, and been exposed to death again and again.

Five times I received from the Jews the forty lashes minus one.

Three times I was beaten with rods, once I was stoned, three times I was shipwrecked, I spent a night and a day in the open sea,

I have been constantly on the move. I have been in danger from rivers, in danger from bandits, in danger from my own countrymen, in danger from Gentiles; in danger in the city, in danger in the country, in danger at sea; and in danger from false brothers.

I have labored and toiled and have often gone without sleep; I have known hunger and thirst and have often gone without food; I have been cold and naked.

Besides everything else, I face daily the pressure of my concern for all the churches.


If you read Foxes Book of the Martyrs (http://www.ccel.org/f/foxe/martyrs/home.html) you will see that Christians are no strangers to suffering and grief. It is clearly taught in His word it will happen, which makes this argument have no weight at all and is simply a strawman.

Sam said that any God who would allow pain either can do nothing or doesnt care to so He is either impotent or evil

This is simply a false dichotomy. God may allow pain for a good reason, which is for the greater good. I'll give you an example:

This is Nick Vujicic, a man with no arms and no legs: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZXlCeKBWfaA

He is a motivational speaker and he has traveled around the world and inspired millions. Pretty much anyone who has a problem can relate to this man because Nick has overcome his extreme adversity with grace and he finds joy in his daily life. If God had answered Nicks prayer to be healed, then millions of people would have been robbed of the fruit that overcoming his adversity bore in his life. This is an example of how God can use pain for a greater good.

Sam asks what about all those who are praying to the wrong God, through no fault of their own..that they missed the revelation

This is just simply false..Sam seems to think that there are no reasonable answer to these questions when the real problem is his ignorance of Christian theology.

Romans 1:18-21

The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 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 men are without excuse.

For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened.


The word of God states that every man coming into the world is given light, and that God makes it clear to them one way or the other that He exists. Every man, woman and child dying after the age of accountability and heading towards hell had received a personal revelation from God as to His existence. How they responded to that light determined what Gods next move was. If they had responded in the affirmitive, He could have then opened the door for them to know Jesus and be saved. Since they responded in the negative, they did not receive any further revelation and died in their sins.

So again Sam creates a strawman argument when he says that they missed the revelation through no fault of their own. The truth is that they received the revelation and rejected it. He also made it sound like people are just randomly born into the world when what the scripture says is that God appoints the times and places for every human being. There are no accidents about where you are born; it is simply that God is not limited by time and space. He is omnipresent and not limited to any particular locality.

Sam accused God creating the cultural isolation of the hindus - of orchaestrating their ignorance

The truth is that in the beginning all men knew God and that over time as men formed nations they moved farther and farther away from the truth about God and invented their own gods to worship. The hindus isolated themselves, though again this is not a limitation on God. He has reached out to every hindu who has ever lived and the ones who ended up in hell are the ones who rejected Him. You have to push past the love, grace and mercy of God to get to hell.

Sam mentions how a serial killer could get saved while an innocent perishes elsewhere:

What the bible says is this:

Romans 3:23

for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,


There aren't any innocents over the age of accountability. The man who has cheated on his wife is equally guilty in Gods eyes as the man who murdered his wife. What God calls good is not a relative standard like human beings use, as we compare ourselves to eachother and think we are good people because we haven't done the big two (rape, murder). What God calls good is moral perfection and what He calls evil is everything that falls short of that, even one sin. He also says that if you hate someone you have murdered them in your heart and you are a murderer at heart. Sam does not appear to understand what the bible says Gods standards actually are.

Sam said that there is absolutely nothing in Christianity to do with moral accountability

Again, this is false. What the bible says is that we're morally accountable to God for every sin we've ever committed, and your conscience will tell you that. It is not other people we have offended, it is God Almighty. What Sam seems to have a problem with is Gods absolute standard for moral accountability versus his relative standard (which conveniently excuses his sins against God)

Sam said there is a conflict between God being intrinsically good and what he describes as the "visitation of cruel unjust suffering on innocent people"

I've already answered this by point out there are no innocent people over the age of accountability. I would also like to add that God created a perfect world, and the reason there is sin in this world is because of mankind. The reason the world is the way it is today is exclusively because of the daily crimes of humanity (can you even begin to imagine the amount of evil that transpires on planet earth in one day?) and not because God wanted it that way.

Sam says it is a cop out to say God is mysterious and then use merely human understanding to establish goodness

Actually, what Sam has done here is create a distorted image of God by twisting or ignoring what the scripture says about Him, and the fate of human beings. Then he points to this grotesque image to condemn the true and living God who is in fact perfectly good. The truth is that His goodness is upheld entirely when you are looking at the true God through a sound understanding of scripture and not the distorted image Sam has created of Him.

Sam says its a cop out to be told God is mysterious to justify untold suffering

He is right here, it is a cop-out..and anyone making such an argument has a weak understanding of the bible. Gods will for us is actually no mystery; God makes it crystal clear what He expects from His creation, and kinds of things we will face. He is even gracious enough to tell us what will happen in the future, thousands of years in advance:

http://www.christadelphianals.org/bible_prophecy.htm

Sam says it is utter hubris and even reprehensible to think you're special because "God loves me don't you know"

Yet even little children understand that no one is worthy to be pardoned for their sins and no one can make it into Heaven on their own. There is absolutely no difference between me and anyone else except for one thing; I said yes to God, and some others say no. I am not worthy, in fact I am decidedly unworthy and I deserve the exact same punishment as everyone else does; the difference is that I accept the free gift of grace that Jesus offers upon the cross. God proved His love for all people on the cross, and He died for every single person, not just me. Jesus loves you more than you can understand.

Sam says it is morally reprehensible for Christians to drudge up some trivial circumstance God took care of while completely ignoring the suffering of other human beings

Sam is right about this and it is a complete shame to Christians everywhere that the western church is so materialistic and base in their feelings. Jesus called us to live a life of total sacrifice and to give up everything we have. I can tell you that God is even more appalled than Sam is about this issue.

Sam asserted that the bible supports slavery

This is false; the bible does not support slavery. Slavery as we understand it today is not the same as it was in the time this was written. In those times it was more of a profession and people would sell themselves into slavery so they could have food and shelter. The bible regulated these activities, but it also said that there was no difference between master and slave and that we are all equal in Christ Jesus. I will also point out that modern slavery was ended by Christians.

Sam says that the bible admonishes us to kill people for witchcraft

No, it does not admonish Christians to kill witches, or anyone else. There is no commandment for any Christians to murder anyone. It is true, however, that in the time of the Old Covenant, God set up laws for Israel which were very strictly enforced with the punishment of death. This was not anything that He ever imposed on the world, or any other people except the Jews. He also did not impose it on them: the Jews made a covenant with God to obey all of His laws, so that He would be their God, and they would be His people.

Sam says that there is absolutely nothing anyone can say against Muslims if they prayed to the right God

The God of the bible is not morally inconsistant, whereas the god of the muslims is.

Sam said Christianity is what only lunatics could believe on their own

The bible says this:

1 Corinthians 1:18

For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.


The scripture itself says that unsaved people will find the message of the cross foolish. This is the evidence that you are perishing. The things of the Spirit of God are foolish to the natural man, neither can he understand them, because they are spiritually discerned.

Sam made a little quip about catholicism

While I am sure there are saved catholics, the church itself departed from the true teachings of Jesus a long time ago.. There is also no teaching in the scripture regarding the Eucharist.

Sam said its very strange salvation depends bad evidence

God gives everyone good evidence that He exists but they suppress the truth. God reveals Himself through personal revelation. You cannot know God otherwise.

Sam says Christianity is a cult of human sacrifice

Jesus wasn't sacrificed against His will:

John 10:18

No one can take my life from me. I sacrifice it voluntarily. For I have the authority to lay it down when I want to and also to take it up again. For this is what my Father has commanded."


He gave His life just as firemen have given their lives trying to save people from a burning building. Jesus didn't have to go to the cross but He did it out of love for us:

John 15:13

Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.


Sam says the bible doesnt repudiate human sacrifice, that it celebrates it

Actually, it does repudiate it in many locations. The practice of sacrificing humans was utterly condemned in scripture. Jesus voluntarily giving Himself for the sins of the world does not resemble what Sam is implying even superficially.

Sam states that people used to bury children under the foundation of buildings and then says "these are the sorts of people who wrote the bible"

The kind of people who wrote the bible were eye witnesses to the life death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. They did not bury children under foundations; they followed the true and living God.

Sam said that if there is a less moral moral framework he hadn't heard of it

As he has presented it, most certainly, but the problem is that he largely invented it from his misunderstanding of Christian theology and personal prejudices.

The true question is this: are you an honest or dishonest skeptic? If you're an honest skeptic you will investigate, but a dishonest skeptic doesn't want to know. You will have to admit that you do not know whether God answers prayer or not, so here is a possible clue to knowledge:

Pray this: God, I don't know if you're there or not, and I don't know if the bible is your word or not. I am asking you to reveal the truth to me, and if you do, I promise to follow it where ever it leads. If it leads to Jesus, I will give my life to Him and follow Him.

After praying this, read the gospel of John. Read it slowly, a little at a time, each time beforehand praying that God will give you revelation concerning what you're reading. If you do this, by the time you reach the end of the gospel your skepticism will have grown wings and flown away.

God bless.

Obama abuses MLK's legacy for Presidential pageantry

GeeSussFreeK says...

Agreed, or even moreso that the Bibile specifically instructs NOT SO WEAR ON GOD OR THE BIBLE... Jesus people!

"Again, you have heard that it was said to the people long ago, ‘Do not break your oath, but keep the oaths you have made to the Lord.’ But I tell you, Do not swear at all: either by heaven, for it is God’s throne; or by the earth, for it is his footstool; or by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the Great King. And do not swear by your head, for you cannot make even one hair white or black. Simply let your ‘Yes’ be ‘Yes,’ and your ‘No,’ ‘No’; anything beyond this comes from the evil one."

-Matthew 5:33-37

That is correct, swearing on the bible says it is from the devil...oops! (of note, not a practicing Christian, so could be off base)

VoodooV said:

I have to admit, I don't understand why we have an inauguration for a 2nd term president. IMO, inaugurations only make sense when the presidency changes.

but then again, we shouldn't be having our presidents swearing on a bible, especially when we have an establishment clause. A simple oath of office is all that's necessary.

OH NO'S!!! Atheists Are Taking Over the World!

Kofi says...

Rabbi - "Moral relativism is the boogeyman but let me tell you how this specific nation should be partially based on an objective truth that .02% believe and I will insist that it is the truth."

Paster - "Evil has no evolutionary explanation yet it exists therefore God exists because the bible says God hates evil and something that doesn't exist cannot hate something that does exist."

Moral of the story - "I'll employ reason and rationality only up until the point that it explains and supports what I believe. Beyond that only God can explain the world around us".

Eric Hovind Debates a 6th Grader

shinyblurry says...

I've offered up a cohesive explanation of what Eric is talking about. The entire point of this video is to mock Eric Hovind by implying that 6th grader beat him in a debate. Yet, the 6th grader had no idea what he was talking about and lost the debate by making an absolute claim. In the same way, I don't think many people have understood the argument here either and assume because of the reaction of the crowd that Eric lost. Perhaps he didn't state his case very eloquently, but he didn't lose, and of course we are missing the entirity of the actual debate that Eric had with the kids dad.

In any case, proving my personal revelation has nothing to do with the argument itself. It is an argument that proves the necessity of God by showing the impossibility of the contrary. In regards to proof, my position has always been, which is also the position of scripture, is that God works by personal revelation. You aren't going to know anything about God without that personal revelation. He does, however, give everyone enough information to seek Him out. Everyone has a conscience and knows they are morally accountable for their sins, and everyone can see in the creation evidence of a Creator. If you want to know what I am saying is true, you can sincerely ask God to come into your life and then He will reveal Himself to you. This is something you can do at any time..

You could pray something like this: Jesus, if you are everything the bible says you are, I will serve you. Please come into my life.

If you mean that He will reveal Himself.

TheSluiceGate said:

That's what he *says*, but he certainly does not offer and proof / argument for this. Sure he waffles on and offers some form of malformed circular logic, but no proof.

Shinyblurry we've talked about this before, and I know you claim that you've gotten your "knowledge" of "God" from your direct explicit conversational contact with him, and a perceived personal manifestation of his presence, but personal experience doesn't stand as any kind of argument / proof for his existence.

I could say that they Stay Puft Marshmallow Man appeared to me in my room last night and told me that eating lettuce was immoral and Justin Bieber is his earthbound minnion. But I'm sure if I told you that's you'd not believe me and look for some kind of proof.

Eric Hovind Debates a 6th Grader

shinyblurry says...

What it proves is that God is the only ground for making knowledge claims. A person receiving revelation from God therefore does have ground for making absolute claims, and has a justified true belief in God.

Whether I could prove that I have received revelation from God is a different question. What is clear is that God could reveal Himself in such a way as you could know it for certain. However, since outside of revelation from God no one has any ground for knowledge claims, they would have no actual grounds for rejecting the claim. They could however test the claim by asking God for that revelation for themselves. This is what the bible says, that the world in its wisdom has never, and will never know anything about God. It is only when God directly reveals Himself to us that we know anything about Him, and Jesus is that revelation of God to the world.

TheSluiceGate said:

But then by the same logic Hovind has no grounds to make an assertion either, because he is subject to the same laws of not having absolute knowledge as he is not a god himself. ===> back to square one.

So your argument is flawed too, because a perceived "revelation" is *not* the same as being demonstrably an actual god.

But yes, the kid should not have made a claim to absolute knowledge to the non-existence of a god.



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon