Atheist Student Instantly HUMBLED by a BRILLIANT Answer

แชร์
ฝัง
  • เผยแพร่เมื่อ 28 ธ.ค. 2024

ความคิดเห็น • 36

  • @jmiogo
    @jmiogo 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +7

    Why always the combative titles? This was a good, healthy discussion.

    • @MagnoliaForgeX
      @MagnoliaForgeX 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Unfortunately, studies have shown it attracts the most view.
      So if the purpose is to expose those lost souls to this solid logic filled discussion, then the combative title serves as the one of the best options to use for most effect.

    • @JediMasterPhilip
      @JediMasterPhilip 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      All about the clicks, baby *rubs hands together*

  • @teknatruth
    @teknatruth 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    Great video, thanks for sharing and bringing to our attention, and explaining the significance of what was said.
    Spoken like a true Child of Truth = tekna Truth

  • @johnelliott5859
    @johnelliott5859 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    How does one justify the bible deity as the source of objective morality, when that being commands and commits genocide, promotes misogyny, endorses slavery and even accepts child sacrifice. Isn't the theist forced into a position where he agrees his god acts immorally or the theist must claim that those acts, which almost all would agree are immoral, are moral when god does them. But, then morality is no longer objective but subject to god's whim. Am I wrong in this? Have I misrepresented anything?

  • @michaelschmitzerle2587
    @michaelschmitzerle2587 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

    “The message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing.” I Cor 1:18

  • @63grandsport11
    @63grandsport11 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

    So Science is proving God exists.

    • @chocopuddingcup83
      @chocopuddingcup83 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      No, it's most certainly not.

  • @maylingng4107
    @maylingng4107 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Brilliant? Frank Turek who lies for a living.

    • @63grandsport11
      @63grandsport11 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      Then so did Sir Isaac Newton. I will stick with FT & Newton before I board your train.

    • @maylingng4107
      @maylingng4107 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@63grandsport11
      Newton never lied. Frank Turek could not carry Newton's jockstraps. Newton was brilliant, Turek is delusional and dumb.

  • @thedude0000
    @thedude0000 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

    _we know morality cause it's written on our hearts_ 🙄
    Not remotely a good answer...at all. It's just an assertion.
    Also, if christians believe objective morality comes from their god, then they MUST ACCEPT the killing of infants & children as morally GOOD
    *1 Samuel 15: 1-3*

    • @Jerry-n9q
      @Jerry-n9q 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Curious. From where or whom do you obtain objective moral truth?

    • @thedude0000
      @thedude0000 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      @@Jerry-n9q I'm not the one claiming objective moral truth exist. Please not address my point.
      Are you a christian, who believes objective morality comes from god?

    • @Jerry-n9q
      @Jerry-n9q 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@thedude0000 You made the positive claim that Turek's statement regarding the moral law is "just an assertion" Based on what? How do you justify your response?

    • @thedude0000
      @thedude0000 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@Jerry-n9q Are you serious? He's claiming moral law is from god without providing evidence.
      That's an assertion on his part....

    • @thedude0000
      @thedude0000 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@Jerry-n9q If you say, "the sky is purple without providing evidence for it....
      It's not my responsibility to then prove it's blue.

  • @Masterbonesmith-e5l
    @Masterbonesmith-e5l 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    The Bible condones slavery, rape, and genocide; what kind of moral foundation is that? Oh, eating shellfish and masturbation totally banned.

    • @HotManJonah
      @HotManJonah 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Masturbation of course is a sin… eating shellfish? No. Remember, the Bible is more than just the Old Testament, read the New Testament

    • @chocopuddingcup83
      @chocopuddingcup83 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      @@HotManJonah So if the Old Testament doesn't really matter, why do Christians keep going back to it for things like the Ten Commandments (and ignore the rest of the commandments where said passages about shrimp and masturbation are) and the other nonsense stories?

    • @handsoap2120
      @handsoap2120 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@chocopuddingcup83Because religion adapts to us! Things must be changed as our society improves so that the old book doesn’t give a bad look to our religion.

    • @chocopuddingcup83
      @chocopuddingcup83 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      @@handsoap2120 If your religion adapts to your modern sensibilities, then said book isn't the inerrant word of God. You're cherry-picking the good bits and throwing out the bad bits. And if you're doing that, why need the book in the first place?

    • @Masterbonesmith-e5l
      @Masterbonesmith-e5l 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      @@HotManJonah I have read the Bible; that's why I'm an atheist. The New Testament condones slavery too! That should have been Jesus's first teaching. "I know pops (which is me) said slavery was cool, but don't keep people. That's wrong! Also, you can spank it but only in the dark. I don't want to watch that shit. "