This might have been real, but lately I've been really disappointed in Steve Harvey. He's too much of a religious douchebag.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'shaq, junk, bigger, family feud, steve harvey, I feel good' to 'shaq, junk, bigger, family feud, steve harvey, I feel good, totally separate idea' - edited by RhesusMonk

Tags for this video have been changed from 'family feud, answer, game show' to 'family feud, answer, game show, steve harvey' - edited by silvercord

I fuckin' hate Steve Harvey.

[redacted]

There is little point in attempting further debate because:

1) You do not even understand what the word debate means.

2) You are not taking the opposing view in the debate, but a third view which you are trying to insert in the middle.

>> ^Mcboinkens:
A debate is a discussion involving more than one viewpoint, so yes, this is in fact a debate.
I already stated my thoughts on morality, it's in one of the other posts I have from earlier. But to amuse you, I'll go ahead and discuss the issue at hand once again.
I suppose my viewpoint is a bit of both of the ideas you presented. The New Testament does indeed lay down a general guidance to behavior based on the life of Jesus. I don't recall too many actual laws that it lays down but I'm not a Biblical scholar. You are, however, confusing morality with choice. A person can choose what they do, but that by no means makes it moral. It's entirely possible that God gave man morals, and sin corrupted it. It's also entirely possible that morality comes from man, since there is no evidence for either side. That's why it's called faith. If there was any complete evidence for or against religion, it'd lead to a pretty big upheaval of one side. That's what makes it so interesting!

[redacted]

>> ^Mcboinkens:
How do you "choose" history? The old testament isn't a law, it's stating what was the law. No choice involved. I appreciate the debate though, it's good practice.
Also: I am pretty sure you are hinting at the fact that God doesn't decide what is moral, but instead people do. But a lot of people I know tend to believe that God gave us morality, so everyone has morals, some just choose not to use them.


I'm not sure if you want to call it a debate. You don't appear to be presenting any arguments, which is pretty much a requisite for it to be an actual debate.

Are you trying to say the New Testament lays down the laws of God and establishes the framework for human morality then? Or are you just saying we're all born with the morals God gave us, but some of us choose to ignore them (which is entirely unprovable and functionally no different from saying morality comes from man)?

Someone should show this to that Steve Harvey guy!

>> ^Mcboinkens:
... But a lot of people I know tend to believe that God gave us morality, so everyone has morals, some just choose not to use them.


I get it! It's just like brains. Everyone has one (well, except for those babies that God hates and refused to give one to), but some just choose not to use them.

[redacted]

>> ^MaxWilder:

>> ^Toshley:
I don't even know where to begin with this.
I never said that atheists don't know the literature and I honestly don't appreciate you trying to turn what I said into a attack on the atheist community.
Let me break it down for you so you can understand it better:
"You're misinformed about the Bible. If you're going to criticize a religion, it might be best to read the literature, in this case... know the reasoning for the Old and New Testament."
Notice that I used "You're" at the beginning of the sentence, meaning you are. You, being a single person. Notice again that I began my next sentence the same way, clearly stating it was directed at the author of the comment, I was kind enough to quote so people didn't take it out of context (oddly wasn't enough).
I don't feel the need to respond to the rest of your message because you seem like the type of person to just twist what I say and try and use it against me.
If you want to be civil and talk with an open-mind, you're more than welcome to talk with me.
>> ^MaxWilder:
Toshley - Please explain Exodus 31:12-15. Although Jesus made a few exceptions for reasons of "compassion" in Matthew 12:1-14, but I don't see how that is a total rejection of the law.
I would advise you not to assume that atheists do not know the literature. Most of us in the US were raised Christian and became atheists because we learned too much about Christianity, and had the capacity for critical thought, which is anathema to religion.
If you feel that the Bible contradicts or invalidates a statement made by an atheist, please state the quote rather than telling somebody that they don't know the literature. Otherwise you will likely find that it is you that don't know it.



Sigh. I know you were talking to a specific person. I'm not an idiot.
You said to Drachen_Jager "You're misinformed about the Bible." And that was the entire thrust of your refutation of his point. But what do you know about his Biblical understanding? That is an assumption you are making because you disagree with him. Rather than dismiss his knowledge on the subject, it would be more helpful if you could support your opinion with facts.
I am simply trying to encourage you to be more specific. If you offer nothing more than vague "You're wrong" responses, you are not contributing to the discussion. As you can see by the other responses in this thread, you will also be barraged by replies questioning your intelligence. Around here people respect two things: humor and rational debate. Rational debate includes supporting evidence and logical reasoning.
I apologize if I seemed uncivil. That was not intended.
I would also welcome a civil conversation, where people do not make assumptions like "... you seem like the type of person to just twist what I say and try and use it against me." No, I will use exactly what you say and use it against you.


Thank you, MaxWilder.

This is the kind of constructive criticism that's useful without being insulting. I know this site if filled with extremely intellectual and open-minded people, I've been coming to this site for a long time and didn't sign up until recently.

You're right that I shouldn't have said "You're misinformed about the Bible.", I should have elaborated. I will be the first to admit that I am not the most intellectual person I know and at times, I don't know how to word something appropriately, that's why I sent him the video that explained what I couldn't put into words. He didn't watch it and that's his decision.

This is going to be the last time I reply to a religious video on Videosift, I don't like arguing about religion because I honestly don't care about the beliefs of others. I respect their decision to choose, we all have the right to say what we want and believe in what we want.

I apologize about my previous statement about you turning my words around, when I read:
"I would advise you not to assume that atheists do not know the literature."

I thought you were implying that I was addressing every atheist. I can tell you as a Christian that most atheists I know, know more about the Bible than some Christians. It's sad but true.

Again, thank you for the reply and I won't be commenting on religion any further.

>> ^Toshley:

I don't even know where to begin with this.
I never said that atheists don't know the literature and I honestly don't appreciate you trying to turn what I said into a attack on the atheist community.
Let me break it down for you so you can understand it better:
"You're misinformed about the Bible. If you're going to criticize a religion, it might be best to read the literature, in this case... know the reasoning for the Old and New Testament."
Notice that I used "You're" at the beginning of the sentence, meaning you are. You, being a single person. Notice again that I began my next sentence the same way, clearly stating it was directed at the author of the comment, I was kind enough to quote so people didn't take it out of context (oddly wasn't enough).
I don't feel the need to respond to the rest of your message because you seem like the type of person to just twist what I say and try and use it against me.
If you want to be civil and talk with an open-mind, you're more than welcome to talk with me.
>> ^MaxWilder:
Toshley - Please explain Exodus 31:12-15. Although Jesus made a few exceptions for reasons of "compassion" in Matthew 12:1-14, but I don't see how that is a total rejection of the law.
I would advise you not to assume that atheists do not know the literature. Most of us in the US were raised Christian and became atheists because we learned too much about Christianity, and had the capacity for critical thought, which is anathema to religion.
If you feel that the Bible contradicts or invalidates a statement made by an atheist, please state the quote rather than telling somebody that they don't know the literature. Otherwise you will likely find that it is you that don't know it.




Sigh. I know you were talking to a specific person. I'm not an idiot.

You said to Drachen_Jager "You're misinformed about the Bible." And that was the entire thrust of your refutation of his point. But what do you know about his Biblical understanding? That is an assumption you are making because you disagree with him. Rather than dismiss his knowledge on the subject, it would be more helpful if you could support your opinion with facts.

I am simply trying to encourage you to be more specific. If you offer nothing more than vague "You're wrong" responses, you are not contributing to the discussion. As you can see by the other responses in this thread, you will also be barraged by replies questioning your intelligence. Around here people respect two things: humor and rational debate. Rational debate includes supporting evidence and logical reasoning.

I apologize if I seemed uncivil. That was not intended.

I would also welcome a civil conversation, where people do not make assumptions like "... you seem like the type of person to just twist what I say and try and use it against me." No, I will use exactly what you say and use it against you.

Congratulations! Your comment has just received enough votes from the community to earn you 1 Power Point. Thank you for your quality contribution to VideoSift.

Hey, I understand. Trying to defend the bible is a bit like being a one legged man in an ass kicking contest, I have the high ground so to speak. But there's no need to be uncivil, I had a perfectly reasonable request which led you to tuck your tail between your legs and sound the retreat. I know it seems that logic and rational argument are unfair weapons in debates on theology because you have no ammunition of your own. Come back when you are ready to discuss things rather than pointing to something someone else made that doesn't even support your side.

>> ^Toshley:

>> ^Drachen_Jager:
Tell me the timecode where he provides the brilliant argument that makes your point then. I don't have time to waste on stupid Christian videos that seem to be only tangentially related to the argument at hand and don't even appear to support your side.
>> ^Toshley:
>> ^Drachen_Jager:
Umm, he says repeatedly in the video that morality is subjective. I got as far as the point where he said he wasn't going to talk about using the bible as on objective standard. The rest just seems to be excusing all the wicked behaviour in the Old Testament on a variety of thin pretexts. I'm not going to waste my time with the whole thing. He certainly seems to be backing my side of this argument.
See this page for moral problems in the New Testament. Obviously even the new/old testament argument doesn't really hold much water. Humans make their own morality, 2,000 year old books are out of date and any idiot who thinks a modern person can safely determine moral issues using no human judgement, only the Bible as a source is utterly hopeless.
>> ^Toshley:
At this point, I am going to go ahead and assume you're a troll.
If you're honestly confused, I suggest you watch:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1PrZeqhsdqE


There's no point in continuing this conversation.
I am looking for intellectual and rational discussion here. You've admitted that you didn't watch the entire video and then expect me to follow some link you provided?
Feel free to continue calling me an idiot, I personally don't care.


You don't have time to waste on a stupid Christian video but yet you had time to watch this one, comment on it, and defend your lack of belief militantly.
Congratulations on time management.
Please stop replying to my messages unless you want to talk in a civil manner. The video was directly related to the discussion at hand, you would have known that if you had watched the entire video.
Of course it "Do not even appear" to support my side because the video touches on multiple subjects.
Troll somewhere else. I am done.