Comments by "MBKKT 90" (@mbkkt9094) on "Jubilee" channel.

  1. Every Christian picks and chooses from the Bible, ignoring parts and placing more importance on some parts than others
    50
  2. It's completely open to interpretation
    24
  3. No sufficient reason to believe one exists
    11
  4. Exactly. Unfortunately Pascal's Wager is still widely used
    11
  5. No, it's progressive Christians versus conservative Christians...
    11
  6. This whole thing is based on an incorrect assumption
    10
  7. Ok. So?
    10
  8. God kills plenty of babies in the Bible
    9
  9. Don't forget about the fact that slavery is condoned and never condemned in the Bible
    8
  10. Or they are agnostic atheists
    8
  11. Democrats also push for gun control, a practical response. Can the same be said for Republicans tweeting out "Thoughts and prayers"?
    7
  12. The God of the Bible does plenty of stuff within in the book worthy of the title of a-hole
    7
  13. We're good, thanks
    7
  14.  @juangabriellopez4475  Whose fault was what? I am talking about you saying how happy you will be when others receive divine punishment. It's a horrible thing to say
    7
  15. And that may bring you a sense of comfort, but if you have a specific reason to be concerned for their safety, it seems like there's more useful things you could do
    7
  16. Wake up to what? What creator are you claiming exists?
    7
  17. Plenty of people may be reassured knowing proper safety precautions were taken. Not everybody is an anti-science conspiracy theorist
    6
  18.  @martinandkaylaanderton  What is facts?
    6
  19. Don't have to, I am.
    6
  20. Who are you to determine who is or is not and actual Christian?
    6
  21.  @hithere7080  Not completely. Within atheism there is both gnostic and agnostic atheism
    6
  22. Every Christian picks and chooses and interprets what the Bible says to fit their own standards
    6
  23. No, an atheist is somebody who doesn't think there is sufficient evidence to believe a God exists.
    5
  24. God does lots of horrible stuff in the Bible. Seems fair to put that label on him
    5
  25.  @Relax4now  Technically he didn't? According to the Bible he most definitely did. And why would it matter if somebody is warned first? It's genocide...
    5
  26.  @ldk2695  Because otherwise you look rather foolish. Condemning others as losers for not sharing a position that you yourself are unable to justify
    5
  27. And how is it a problem if a non-believer cannot answer those questions?
    5
  28.  @elliemccreesh6324  I need proof because exceptional claims require exceptional evidence. To claim as fact that a God exists is to make a statement that if true, would forever alter mankind's understanding of everything we know. It is the biggest claim that could be made. To accept it with no proof is something nobody should do. I never said I needed physical proof. I would accept compelling evidence in any form. There is none
    5
  29. How is being homosexual sinful? What harm is caused by two people of the same gender entering a loving relationship?
    5
  30. That's awkward because I think of him more like just a friend
    4
  31. Huh? Nobody was pushing anything. If anything the opposite is true. LGBTQ youth raised in strict religious households are far more likely to contemplate or attempt suicide
    4
  32.  @iyke4566  What did they get wrong?
    4
  33.  @Relax4now  Why not take an example many are familiar with, the flood. God committing genocide and almost entirely wiping out mankind
    4
  34.  @datonecolombianboi1555  Surely there's a difference though. If somebody is praying and expecting something to happen as a direct result of it, then it is a waste of time. If they are prating simply because it brings them comfort, fine
    4
  35. Prove it
    4
  36. Fiction: Christianity
    4
  37. In his defense, how many people are familiar with the Christian view by now? And how often does a Satanist get a platform to speak?
    4
  38. How so?
    4
  39. "lead to humans and multitudes of animals that are perfect?" We are far from perfect. In many ways our bodies are a mess. Are you perhaps unfamiliar with what the theory of evolution states?
    4
  40. Says who?
    3
  41. Every Christian picks and chooses what they want from the Bible
    3
  42.  @beingroxy  It is most definitely not a cop out. Christians are claiming the existence of something, that if true would fundamentally change the entire world's understanding of the very nature of reality. I think asking for proof is fair. And if God is as mighty as people claim, you could deny his existence upon witnessing it?
    3
  43.  @mr.b8780  Yeah, like a bunch of other nations do it
    3
  44. Pretty sure the threat of going to hell is not really a concern for them....
    3
  45. Says who? Plenty of happy non-Christians
    3
  46.  @studentofthesaviors.o.s  What valid reason would one have to think a relationship between two adults of the same sex is wrong?
    3
  47. If the scientific method doesn't apply to it, then it can;t be tested and be shown to be true
    3
  48.  @lazr9672  "how can something create all this around us and not know what came before it. " That doesn't make sense, if you are referring to a first cause then there wouldn't be anything before it. You also seem to be suggesting the first cause is sentient, that it would not "know" something but you haven't explained why. I am still not seeing how this is scientifically impossible. If you want to claim to me that you can jump, unaided, from the ground 5000 ft into the sky, I can prove to you that is scientifically impossible. That may include a discussion of biology and the limitations of the human body, or of physics and the force of gravity. How is nothing creating everything scientifically impossible? What in our scientific knowledge shows that such a thing has zero chance of occurring
    3
  49. What do you mean?
    3
  50. I don't get it....
    3
  51. Those were the characters in the book, yes. But if that's supposed to sum up your entire position on the important conversation on the LGBT community and human rights, I feel it's lacking just a degree of nuance buddy
    3
  52. Says who?
    3
  53. How do you know they were filled with the Holy Spirit?
    3
  54. Well first of all, there are plenty of contradictions in the Bible. But let's say two people both struggle with understanding a Biblical passage,both pray on it and both claim to have been pointed towards different answers. How do we know who is correct?
    3
  55. Seriously? Studies have shown Fox News viewers are more misinformed than people who don't watch any news at all haha
    3
  56.  @mosesgebremichael2723  And because they are a potentially liberal institution, everything they put out should automatically be dismissed?
    3
  57.  @mosesgebremichael2723  And it's weird that you seem to think that the survey/study would be conducted by simple, easily influenced undergrad students. It's done by staff and research fellows. And then is typically done not on anybody in attendance at the university or with connections to it, but on randomly selected individuals in entirely different locations You do understand that, right?
    3
  58.  @ldk2695  Me?
    3
  59.  @ldk2695  Which God? And why would you think that?
    3
  60.  @ldk2695  Why would you think that? And which God?
    3
  61. Why would you want that?
    3
  62. That's how everybody uses the Bible...
    3
  63. Disrespected in what way?
    3
  64. How can you be pro-life and pro-choice?
    3
  65. "You can’t be a liberal and be a Christian". Why not?
    3
  66. Oh dear. You are going to have to excuse a lot of horrible stuff if you believe every words has to be taken literally and never changes
    3
  67. Does one have to be Christian to comment on Christian viewpoints?
    3
  68.  @alldayrj2k_939  It is homophobic
    3
  69. The amount of people skeptical of these "psychics" in the comments is giving me hope for humanity
    3
  70.  @loveoneanother6010  Faith needs no proof, yes. But that also means that if all you have is faith, then nobody has any reason to believe your claim thag there is a creator
    3
  71.  @chigasaki06  How do you know they were inspired by the Holy Spirit?
    3
  72. I think he's happier with the money
    3
  73.  @ylsfad3720  It most certainly was not. You are perhaps referring to the rules laid out for owning Israelite as slaves. It was 7 years and there were ways around it that would allow you to keep the slave forever. If you were a prisoner of war or from another tribe no such 7 year rule applied
    3
  74. Well let's be fair, I would hope nobody is "pro abortion", they are "pro-choice". That issue could be applied to taxation as a whole. Should somebody who doesn't want to pay taxes still have to? Of course. If they want to continue to benefit from living in that society the need to contribute to it financially.
    3
  75. Morality doesn't come from God. Basically every society in the world has laws against murder, theft etc.
    3
  76. @Bernie Sanders Abortion largely deals with fetuses, not children. Big difference
    3
  77. Seems like there are definitely some parts of the Bible it would be beneficial to subtract...
    3
  78. Yes, all except one
    3
  79. Well that's a debate I would like to see
    3
  80.  @Banana-eb8qr  " Christian Science" isn't simply referring to any scientist who is a Christian. It's a specific sub-sect or movement within Christianity
    3
  81. No it's not. Being a homophobe is however
    3
  82.  @lianobodynobodynobody5083  The Bible also condones the taking of prisoners of war as slavery, the beating of slaves and provides examples of when the seven year rule need not be obeyed. So it condones taking somebody against their will, forcing them to work for you, beating them and not releasing them. What a lovely book....
    3
  83.  @lynebenoit5124  Leviticus 19:19
    3
  84. Yes it is. Clue's in the name
    3
  85.  @joyven8591  How do you know the Bible is God's word?
    3
  86. @Çaesar Right, so my book makes a claim that Christians will hate it's content. When they do, they have validated the entire book and therefore given validity to its claim that I am the Messiah, right? Just following your logic
    2
  87. Because their actions, informed by their faith, impact everybody
    2
  88. There are two main kinds of atheism, gnostic atheism and agnostic atheism. They likely meant they are an agnostic atheist
    2
  89. Which is why I have always been confused why so many self-confessed Christians in the States seem to support the Death Penalty and the NRA
    2
  90. Ah, so straight couples who can't or don't want to have children shouldn't get married in the church?
    2
  91. I agree with Maksie. Being European, hearing Americans rail against universal healthcare whilst clearly understanding nothing about it is a strange mixture of amusing and saddening
    2
  92. So....?
    2
  93. Tell that to the Republican party
    2
  94. "Women and men both had a choice to have sex". You know that's not always the case, right?
    2
  95. Progressive Christians = Recognize there are valuable messages to be found in a holy text, that can still be applied to the modern world Conservative Christians = Refuse to get with the times, even if it means accepting some of the horrors the Bible contains
    2
  96. Have you not read the Bible? God kills and tortures countless people unnecessarily
    2
  97. There clearly is. 3 of them are in the video buddy
    2
  98. What exactly within the progressive movement is "harmful to the order of mankind in any age of existence"?
    2
  99.  @maksiono1488  Really? How interesting. And how did you come to arrive at that conclusion?
    2
  100.  @maksiono1488  So from the limited number of atheists you have met, you feel comfortable determining what they all look like? Fascinating. How is that?
    2
  101.  @Frindow  All atheists look like that? How did you come to that conclusion? Can I say that all Christians look like members of the Westboro Baptist Church?
    2
  102. Why wouldn't any reasonable person support it?
    2
  103.  @ellapoota9630  "Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve"? My what a charming little rhyme. Did you make it yourself? What demonstrable harm is caused by a loving same-sex couple getting married?
    2
  104. If there's a God who genuinely doesn't support the LGBT community and thinks women are inferior to men, why on earth would you support and worship such a God?
    2
  105. When?
    2
  106. Kind of irrelevant if both kinds of astrology are not grounded in fact
    2
  107. " And yes some church folk can be nasty but this doesn't mean we "make up an idea" of what God is like by our own will". Well let's be fair. As God's existence remains unproven everybody's idea of him is technically made up
    2
  108. What masks would those be?
    2
  109. Why can you not be gay and Christian?
    2
  110.  @prettykittiecandie5909  That happens in a number of these videos. If you have successfully fallen for somebody's deception a feeling of frustration seems perfectly natural right? Especially since falling for that deceptipn has cost you prize money
    2
  111. Were "irresponsible"? Wow....
    2
  112. Being gay, bi or trans isn't a sin to "overcome" at all
    2
  113.  @ejm821  Why would I listen to the Bible on this. It's just common sense
    2
  114.  @ejm821  Yeah, of course I am. Any self respecting Christian should ask themselves that question as well, shouldn't they?
    2
  115.  @ejm821  You don't think Christians should ever examine their own faith? So you just follow blindly with no thought involved? How sad
    2
  116.  @ejm821  Because you see the Bible as guide, to be put in context, not complete fact to be taken literally. You agree with the moral teachings of the Bible?
    2
  117. Right? It's nice to see Christians actually rejecting blind faith and recognizing that love is love
    2
  118.  @alexmercer936  So? How does that not make them devout Christians?
    2
  119. And yet it does support slavery, so forgive me if I look for my morals elsewhere
    2
  120.  @cameronbritton685  How are they not brainwashed if they're Christian? Christian indoctrination is a pretty common thing
    2
  121. What exactly is wrong with a same sex relationship?
    2
  122. Plenty of gay Christians out there
    2
  123. Oh yeah. Trump is famous for never tearing people down and lashing out. And all for building things up. Well, not a wall so far, but he might get there some day...
    2
  124.  @lazr9672  Yeah, I asked how you determined that is a scientific impossibility
    2
  125.  @lazr9672  So how does that make it a scientific impossibility? There is a difference between not knowing something and it being completely scientifically impossible
    2
  126. How does one "look like an atheist" exactly?
    2
  127. Contrary to God's law? How do you know God's law?
    2
  128.  @hipnclassic3101  If it's providing truth is contingent upon first believing in it, then it is not objectively true and should not be taken as such
    2
  129. ​@That's Life inherent advantages possessed by a white person on the basis of their race in a society characterized by racial inequality and injustice.
    2
  130. @That's Life I live in South Korea, and though I do receive some forms of discrimination, it is well understood among the foreign community here that I am likely to have a much moire positive experience than those who are black, or south-east Asian for example
    2
  131. @That's Life It's clear white privilege. I possess advantages over other foreigners here due to the fact that I am white. The fact that I experience some discrimination myself doesn't negate that. And can't help but feel like your last sentence is just foreboding the phrase "I'm not racist, but....."
    2
  132.  @Noloyiso_M  How is cheating on a partner in a sexual relationship comparable to entering a loving relationship with somebody of the same gender?
    2
  133. Why? Plenty of atheists are well acquainted with the Bible
    2
  134.  @devynpanchal7612  Because they are former Christians. Or because they wanted to be well informed of all options before confirming they are athesit
    2
  135. Why would you want to worship a God who will destroy people on a whim?
    2
  136. Conservatives "think for themselves" yet also usually blindly follow or god a creator...? You don't see the problem there?
    2
  137.  @BuildingApologetics  I am familiar with both arguments and of Christian apologists' affinity for both, I find neither convincing and as somebody who seems to enjoy this topic you must know the multitude of criticisms levied against both arguments?
    2
  138.  @BuildingApologetics  Let's start with the Kalam The truth of your first premise is indeterminate. Through modern science, specifically physics, natural phenomena have been discovered whose causes have not yet been discerned or are non-existent The argument also suffers from the fallacy of composition: what is true of a member of a group is not necessarily true for the group as a whole. Just because most things within the universe require a cause/causes, does not mean that the universe itself requires a cause. For instance, while it is absolutely true that within a flock of sheep that every member ("an individual sheep") has a mother, it does not therefore follow that the flock has a mother. There is an equivocation error lurking in the two premises of the Kalām version of the argument. They both mention, in your wording, something "beginning to exist". The syllogism is only valid if both occurrences of that clause refer to the exact same notion. In the first premise, all the things ("everything") that we observe beginning to exist form by some sort of transformation of matter or energy, or a change of some state or process. So this is the notion of "beginning to exist" in the first premise. In the second premise there is no matter or energy to be transformed or reshaped into the universe. (We are probably speaking of something coming from nothing.) The two notions of "beginning to exist" are thus not identical and therefore the syllogism is invalid.
    2
  139. How is it a fact?
    2
  140. Every Christians picks and chooses from scripture though
    2
  141. If the whole world was not heterosexual and cis-gendered, childbirth wouldn't just stop. How do you think gay couples have babies currently? And there are many biblical scholars who believe that verse has long been mistranslated and it is not that man shall not lie with man, but with boy. It is condemning relationships with young children
    2
  142. And your basis for this claim is what?
    2
  143.  @jocularranime6807  You can easily compare the two. Christians believe Christ is a figure to emulate. You could easily make a religion based around Superman and wanting to be more like him. You don't have to believe Superman is actually real, but can recognize he has positive attributes you want to emulate. Satanists don't believe in a literal Satan, but the figure still plays a part in the religion And no, there is not a lot of proof for the existence of a deity
    2
  144. Yep, that's hopefully his final year in office
    2
  145. I don't get it. What does common sense have to do in this situation? Surely the way you win this is by lying and deceiving? Are you suggesting that the Republican would win because they are naturally better at lying and deceiving? That's not cool dude
    2
  146. What study is that? Because I typed "moon affects us physically" into Google and literally the first thing that came up was the British Royal Museums asserting there is zero proof it does
    2
  147. What? No it wasn't. It was a policy started under Trump. There's literal video of Jeff Sessions announcing it...
    2
  148.  @DarkSektori  But again dude, this whole thing falls apart within the first five lines. It is built on a false assumption
    2
  149.  @natashablessed410  Bless me with what?
    2
  150. How so?
    2
  151.  @brian_tv1172  So you have to mention Jesus to be Christian? And who says you can't support the LGBTQ community and be Christian?
    2
  152. Don't debate the Bible? So do you believe the Bible is 1005 true? Unchanging?
    2
  153.  @lenalove8138  Ok. So you, for example, are ok with the practice of slavery, as the Bible is?
    2
  154.  @sunkyokim6052  It is most certainly a problem with Christianity
    2
  155.  @sunkyokim6052  Right. But to determine that they are false pastors you would first have to prove things like that Jesus was in fact killed and rose and that the Bible is the literal word of God. And that cannot be done
    2
  156. It's hardly a free choice though, is it? If a non-religious person choose a life of celibacy, it may not be easy but that is their free choice. In Angel's situation, he is choosing this with what he believes to be the threat of eternal hell hanging over his head. It's sad.
    2
  157. Nah, I'm good.
    2
  158.  @jesusislord1560  Brother? Why would you call me that? And what "right path" would that be?
    2
  159.  @jesusislord1560  Why do you keep calling me brother? Are you under the impression I am male? And why would you ask someone to show me mercy? Are they about to do something horrible to me?
    2
  160.  @reynarobles4384  "I’m done . Go figure it out" Usually said by those who weren't expecting to be called out on their claims And yours is a huge on to make. I can't see anything in Sanger's life history to support that. Sounds like mere conspiracy to me
    2
  161. Why not?
    2
  162.  @luceliorodrigues7504  Ok. So?
    2
  163. "the perfect distance away and the perfect size for life." What do you mean by that?
    2
  164. They are open minded. They gave plenty of opportunities for the astrologers to explain their views, they asked fair questions, they weren't rude or aggressive. They just didn't accept what they were told, as they shouldn't in this instance
    2
  165. Says who?
    2
  166.  @SarethZhukov314  "f guns were banned we'd still have issues with rape, murder, kidnapping, etc. " Exactly. We are always going to have drunk and reckless drivers, so what's the point of traffic laws? People are always going to find access to dangerous drugs, so what's the point of drug laws?
    2
  167.  @mavow_  How was that rude?
    2
  168.  @mavow_  Why shouldn't they be able to use the label they think fits best. The Biblical God is by all accounts a monster. "A-hole" seems a pretty tame way to say it
    2
  169. What's wrong with a church having a lesbian pastor?
    2
  170.  @GloryBeToGodForever  I mean what is wrong with it? Why shouldn't it be allowed? What harm is it causing?
    2
  171.  @snowflake3129  And that's fine. The problem is however where one's belief crosses over into another's life and starts to cause them unhappiness
    2
  172.  @redphoenix9468  I never said you were conservative.... Of course the non-religious can comment on religion. Actions informed by their faith affect everybody. For example, if I am gay and I am unable to get married because a Christian lobby is preventing law being passed, I can definitely be critical of the faith.
    2
  173. I know what you mean. I am British and I regularly get stunned at how many American conservatives are misinformed about universal healthcare and are willing to paint it as some evil force
    2
  174. Says who?
    2
  175.  @lotus9865  Got a quote?
    2
  176.  @lotus9865  Do I? Ok. So?
    2
  177.  @lotus9865  Your little cousin has an interest in epistemology? How interesting
    2
  178.  @lotus9865  Ah ok. So how are she and I similar?
    2
  179. The reality of creation? What do you mean?
    2
  180.  @scottsmith3236  Right, so you are just ignoring the fact that the Bible permits owning somebody and beating them....?
    2
  181.  @scottsmith3236  A person owned by another as property
    2
  182. "Not believing that the whole Bible is the word of God is dangerous". But what reason is there to believe every word is the word of God?
    2
  183.  @elliemccreesh6324  But why on earth would you alter your entire understanding of reality based on a being, whose existence you acknowledge isn't confirmed fact?
    2
  184. Says who?
    2
  185. Trump?
    2
  186. ​ @ylsfad3720  If during the time your slave was working for him, the master was to find the slave a wife, then when the 7 years was up and time came for the slave to be released, his wife was unable to go with him. Meaning the slave had to choose between freedom or his family. If he chose to stay with his family, then he would now be required to stay with the master for life . They then pierced the slaves ear as proof of this, almost like tagging the ear of cattle. Leviticus 25:44-46 44 “‘Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. 45 You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. 46 You can bequeath them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly." So God is a racist I guess who made different rules for his "chosen people" but will allow those from other tribes to be bought and sold as property. and even inherited as property upon death And you speak of fair working conditions? According to the Bible a slave owner is free to beat their slave as they please since the slave is their property. The only condition is that they don't die after a couple of days . Well, that is if they are an Israelite. There is no such protection recorded for slaves of other nations or prisoners of war.
    2
  187.  @roneldell5137  Wow, I thought people had moved past trying to actually use Pascal's Wager in an argument
    2
  188. It was a Democrat who passed the Civil Rights Act....
    2
  189.  @gregstickler3798  Surely an incredibly important one to have? Especially if you are painting those who get an abortion as simply those who " decide to have fun sexually"?
    2
  190.  @sunkyokim6052  What if we are reincarnated? What if there is no afterlife at all? There is no point in dealing in "what ifs" when there is no good reason to suspect they are true
    2
  191. I don't get it. Are you saying that Republicans aren't for gender quality?
    2
  192. Exactly, you are just born that way
    2
  193. Every Christian cherry picks from the Bible
    2
  194.  @thatboybighoss5658  Bit odd to mention consent when marriage at the time of the Bible was essentially fathers selling off their daughters
    2
  195. I am sure there's plenty of liberals in comments sections willing to have a back and forth with you
    2
  196.  @BrianaB18  That's still not the case though
    2
  197. Not at all
    2
  198. Well yeah, but when you say "The Bible says" you are also implicitly saying "I believe the Bible is true and the Bible says...". It's all a matter of personal belief and interpretation.
    2
  199. Only a problem if you take the bible in its entirety literally
    2
  200.  @manueltheguitarstudent8441  As far as I am aware the vast majority of modern atheists don't believe in a literal Satan. It is an atheistic religion built around the character or figure of Satan
    2
  201. Huh....?
    2
  202. I don't understand. What do you mean?
    2
  203. "You should love your family regardless of their religion, sexual orientation or political beliefs." Why? If I were gay and my entire family rejected me, threw me out the house and told me I was deserving of eternal pain and torture, I think I would be justified in cutting ties and finding a new family for myself
    2
  204. Don't see the irony in claiming somebody is disrespectful and then calling them "Dracula"?
    2
  205. Says who?
    2
  206.  @JP-dp3kt  I don't know if it's good news as such. What I mean is I see no reason why I should believe that a divine Jesus existed. There is no evidence. And the names of those texts would be great
    2
  207. I don't understand. Care to elaborate?
    2
  208.  @johndeoliveira8476  That's not historical fact. There was likely a man called Jesus who lived, but there is no proven fact about his divinity
    2
  209. Two reasons, either he knows it sounds wrong/offensive and he doesn't care, or he is unaware that it is not the correct way to refer to a transgender person, and yet still feels he is educated enough on the subject to speak on it. Either way he comes off looking foolish
    2
  210.  @nicholasgee9127  Not a fair comparison. And an especially odd one to choose when the Bible condones slavery...
    2
  211.  @cpg6541  Says the very concept of God. An omniscient God is incompatible with free will
    2
  212.  @shanegodman1251  Since when was being pro-choice an exclusively liberal position?
    2
  213. That's a rather specific fetish
    2
  214. What is a "real" Christian?
    2
  215. Whatever you need to tell yourself to try and justify your irrational prejudice
    2
  216. You think Democrats are children of the devil? As in the political party?
    2
  217.  @lianobodynobodynobody5083  It says nothing about them repaying their debt. It says the owner is able to beat his slave as the slave is his property. Are you able to provide context to justify that?
    2
  218.  @lianobodynobodynobody5083  I saw you misinterpret the verse and then give no justification for it. Do you think it is ok to beat your slaves?
    2
  219.  @lianobodynobodynobody5083  I quoted the King James version. It discusses smiting a servant with a rod. Beating them. It is clear as day. It doesn't matter at all if it was OT. Please answer my other question. Do you think it is ok, or has ever been ok to own and beat slaves?
    2
  220.  @lianobodynobodynobody5083  What? How are you still misreading this verse after all this time? It doesn't say the slave owner has to die. It says if the slave dies as a result of the owner beating them, the owner will be punished. If the owner beats the slave and it doesn't end in death, that is permissible. It is not actively encouraging beating as such, but it is condoning it as a moral, justifiable act. It doesn't state anything at all about the slave having to have done something bad to receive a beating. It simply says the owner is free to beat them as they like as the slave is their property. Just draws the line at killing. And it does matter. It means that at some point in time God considered both slave owning and the beating of said slaves a moral act. Hence my question. Do you think slavery has ever been morally ok?
    2
  221.  @lianobodynobodynobody5083  Yeah, it reducing a person to nothing more than property. If you beat somebody so badly they can't work any more, then you have already been punished enough? It's abhorrent. Why do you keep using volunteer and non volunteer slaves as if this makes a difference? If these people were paid full time employees and the bible said you could still beat them as you like, it's still not ok! And do you not understand what condone means? The bible condones and never condemns slavery and it condones the beating of slaves. Seriously never thought I would find somebody defending slavery in this day and age....
    2
  222. Are you suggesting that if people did more research they would find there is truth to astrology?
    2
  223.  @wakandaforeva6316  It all sounds like a lot of "can" and "tends to". But if astrology indicates nothing for certain, how can it be tested or trusted? How can it be known to be true?
    2
  224.  @ThatControlUser  Good shout. Puddle analogy is what came to mind as soon as I saw what they were writing
    2
  225.  @telvinphiri1620  You seem to have not understood the message of the puddle analogy. Nor have you answered my question about the appendix. Care to give it a try?
    2
  226.  @telvinphiri1620  Why do you keep responding to others and ignoring my point, friend? How is the appendix perfect design?
    2
  227.  @telvinphiri1620  So what about the appendix? It's not a variation or abnormality? It is something everybody is born with that is FAR from perfect design
    2
  228.  @telvinphiri1620  And I have now explained this to you multiple times, that is irrelevant. We can take out an appendix and notice zero change in a person's quality of life, unlike removing a kidney for example. That means that whatever role the appendix plays is absolutely minute. In contrast, keeping it has the potential to result in spontaneous death. So PLEASE will you finally either explain to me how that is evidence of perfect design or concede you are wrong.
    2
  229.  @BigEvan96  Why not? If their church is ok with it what's the problem?
    2
  230. Says who?
    2
  231. How so?
    2
  232.  @ricardovasquezjr8493  Why do you think he carries a "bad spirit?
    2
  233. Atheism is by very definition a lack of belief
    2
  234.  @asap9224  I am not claiming that I believe God does not exist. I am saying there is insufficient evidence or good reason to say that he does. I am not making my own claim denying existence, I am rejecting a claim OF existence. It's completely different.
    2
  235.  @asap9224  Well no, there is both Gnostic Atheism and Agnostic Atheism. A Gnostic atheist would claim with certainty that there is no God and would have reasoning for do so. It is a less common position these days. Conversely an Agnostic Atheist maintains that one cannot say there is a God because there is not sufficient evidence to arrive at such a conclusion. I suggest you educate yourself more on what atheism entails before making false statements about it
    2
  236. And if we "understand the language" would we find truth to astrology?
    1
  237.  @Karen-ih2mt  I will quite happily convert if you can give me any single convincing reason as to why I should
    1
  238. No it doesn't. Most modern Satanists are atheists who don't believe in a literal Satan
    1
  239. Huh? I don't understand. Can you explain?
    1
  240. @Çaesar That's not proof no matter how many times you post it. Today I have written a book claiming I am the new Messiah, all world religions are wrong and that soon all will bow before me, and one verse states that "Christians will not like this book". If Christians object to the contents of my book, that is proof I am the new Messiah, right?
    1
  241. Never heard of Jeff Durban but David Lynn is far too combative and aggressive a personality to have on here, where measured discussion is required
    1
  242. Ok....
    1
  243. Why the quotation marks around gay christian?
    1
  244.  @renythepooh9127  Why is being gay wrong?
    1
  245.  @renythepooh9127  I am aware that Christians claim the Bible says so. But I am asking you personally. Why should it be considered wrong? What demonstrable harm is caused?
    1
  246.  @renythepooh9127  So you just blindly trust the Bible? I mean, if the bible says murder is wrong, I can understand that, I can see what harm is caused by murder. Same with lying, stealing, etc. But what harm is caused by two people of the same sex entering into a relationship? WHY should it be considered sinful?
    1
  247.  @renythepooh9127  So you can't justfy why it is wrong beyond "Because the Bible says so"? Do you just blindly accept all moral judgements of the Bible without evaluating them first?
    1
  248.  @renythepooh9127  The Bible has plenty of instances of God telling people to do horrible things. Which is why I find it troubling when people say they accept its version of morality without question
    1
  249.  @renythepooh9127  Slavery. The Bible never says its wrong and even gives instructions on where to buy slaves and how much you are allowed to beat your slaves
    1
  250.  @renythepooh9127  Exodus 21: 20-21 ""If a man beats his male or female slave with a rod and the slave dies as a direct result, he must be punished, but he is not to be punished if the slave gets up after a day or two, since the slave is his property."
    1
  251.  @renythepooh9127  I am not taking anything out of context. The verse quite clearly says one is free to beat their slave, with the only limit being that the slave should not have died fron their injuries after a couple of days. It's abhorrent, right?
    1
  252.  @renythepooh9127  I never said the Bible actively encourages slavery. Nevertheless by your own admission it condones and never condemns it, right?
    1
  253.  @renythepooh9127  You could own people as property and beat them as you liked unless they died. Do you consider that moral?
    1
  254.  @renythepooh9127  It wasn't different. People were sold and bought as property and beaten by their masters. That is abhorrent. Why are you trying to make excuses for slavery?
    1
  255. Why? Star signs don't actually tell you anything about a person
    1
  256. Every Christian picks and chooses when it comes to scripture
    1
  257. So rare that a single genuine one has never been found
    1
  258. Can I ask why not? So many Christians will say same sex attraction is sinful, but I have never heard a justification for why it should be considered sinful
    1
  259.  @abigailandrade9574  Ok, but why is that a bad thing? What I mean is, if God says murder is wrong, I can see why. Same with stealing. If he says to observe the Sabbath, I guess that makes sense, having a holy day. I can understand all of those. But what is wrong about a loving, same sex relationship?
    1
  260.  @abigailandrade9574  "is for husband and wife to come together in physical union." Ok. So a same-sex couple can just wait until marriage then.
    1
  261.  @abigailandrade9574  Or husband and husband, wife and wife. Why not?
    1
  262.  @abigailandrade9574  And what is that exactly?
    1
  263.  @abigailandrade9574  But explain to me what is so bad about a same sex relationship. Are you unable to?
    1
  264.  @abigailandrade9574  But why should you need to Abigail? You have told me repeatedly now that God made man for woman but you haven't told me how same sex attraction is an inherently bad thing
    1
  265. Who?
    1
  266. @Kueen Kaela Who? And why?
    1
  267.  @IssyFishyy  "and plenty of mathematical models prove that it is impossible to be carried out by chance." That's a new on me. Got those equations so I can have a look at this mathematical proof?
    1
  268. What are you basing that on?
    1
  269.  @fromthehills814  Interesting. You have any figures to back that up? Would be curious to see some
    1
  270.  @makeyourmommaproud6500  Diamante is not wrong, the vast majority of modern Satanists are atheists
    1
  271.  @makeyourmommaproud6500  First of all, I am an atheist. And second of all, go look up The Satanic Temple. Modern Satanists are atheists who do not believe in the literal existence of Satan. They just use him as a figure to base their religion around. You are speaking on matters you clearly have not looked into
    1
  272.  @littlefab5389  Nah, I am good thanks
    1
  273.  @makeyourmommaproud6500  No they dont. The Satanic Temple are an atheistic organization who focus on Satanic imagery because they believe it helps them prove a point in fighting against the potential rise of a Christian theocracy in America. You really should look into them before you keep commenting...
    1
  274.  @makeyourmommaproud6500  No. An atheist is just that. There is no intrinsic link to science. Again you are talking to one. And again, just look up the Satanic Temple dude. The more you attempt to talk on the subject without doing so the more ignorant you look
    1
  275.  @makeyourmommaproud6500  These atheists are. Tell me, have you actually looked it up to check after all I have said to you or are you really that arrogant?
    1
  276. Why not?
    1
  277.  @sososleepyy  I never said "most" Christians support the death penalty, I said many do. And a 2014 survey by the Public Religion Research Institute found that 59% of white Evangelicals, 52% of white Protestants and 45% of White Catholics supported the death penalty as the appropriate punishment for those convicted of murder. Seems like a pretty substantial number of Christians to me...
    1
  278. The bible speaks about a lot of stuff. No reason to take any of it literally. If he wants to interpret the messages of the Bible as he pleases and focus on the positive, let him
    1
  279. How so?
    1
  280.  @angelsong6490  When did Jesus condemn homosexuality?
    1
  281. Every Christian cherry picks
    1
  282.  @ShanqDad  I am not a Christian. But every Christian does cherry pick, whether that be ignoring some parts of the Bible completely or emphasizing some parts excessively over others. It's why there is no unified Christian Church
    1
  283.  @ShanqDad  You analogy doesn't really work here Brian. Why would I need to be a doctor to know what cars it is they drive. Statisticians could find that out through surveys etc. Same applies here. I don't have to be a Christian to know things about or have opinions on Christianity. Many religious scholars are themselves irreligious. And as I pointed out, I feel safe saying that every Christian cherry picks as there is no one, unified Christian Church with the unquestionably correct interpretation of the Bible. Every Church and every believer is taking what they want to find from the Bible and most are claiming that to be true. As there is no clear way to determine who's interpretation is correct, if any, then there is no way to say who is cherry picking in contrast to those following the "correct way", and therefore everybody is simply making their own versions of Christianity
    1
  284.  @ShanqDad  I just explained this to you. I don't have to be Christian to comment on Christian matters. And what do you mean I am not an atheist? I don't believe I ever told you what my position is You don't cherry pick? So you are saying that you alone have the exact, correct understanding of how the Bible is supposed to be read, understood and put into practice? That's amazing. Why aren't you sharing this with the world and uniting all the sects of Christianity?
    1
  285.  @ShanqDad  I can most definitely talk about Christianity and will continue to do so. You really still don't understand the flaws in your logic. If you want to argue that somebody is cherry picking, deviating from an obvious truth and choosing to accept tje truth in its entirety, you must first establish that there is indeed a true, factual position they are deviating from. So how is that you know that your interpretation of the Bible is correct?
    1
  286.  @ShanqDad  You seem to have ignored my last question Brian. If YOU want to claim that progressive Christians are cherry picking from the Bible to make their own, incorrect version of Christianity, you first need to establish that there is indeed a true, correct version that they are deviating from. Can you do that?
    1
  287.  @ShanqDad  Guess you can't do it
    1
  288.  @ShanqDad  You most certainly have not And it is not the responsibility of an atheist to prove anything when it comes to the truth claim that a God exists or that the Bible is his word. That show a fundamental misunderstanding of how a burden of proof works. If YOU want to claim that a God is real, then YOU must prove that claim. An atheist is under no obligation to disprove it at all
    1
  289. ​ @ShanqDad  If you are going to open byu telling me who wrong I am, you should probably ensure that the analogy that follows is indeed correct. A courtroom analogy is often used to demonstrate the burden of proof but you have the roles completely wrong. In this case the Christian would be the prosecutor. Think of it this way.Imagine I accused you of murder. I take you to court. I am the prosecutor, I am the one attempting to make a truth claim. Are you required to prove me wrong? No. It it my job to show a judge or jury beyond a doubt that my claim is in fact true. It is even why courts use the phrase "not guilty: The onus is not on you to prove 100% that you are not a murder, but on me to prove at this point in time that you are. So in this situation the burden of proof lies with you. If you want to claim that a God exists and the Bible is his word, you must prove it. I don't have to disprove it in any way. And you have not even attempted to prove it. You have simply claimed it as fact and have been arrogant enough to attempt to tell me what it is I do and do not know
    1
  290.  @ShanqDad  Right, so just choosing to completely gloss over the fact that you were completely wrong about how a burden of proof works? I would gladly embrace Christianity and Jesus if I actually had any compelling reason to believe that in doing so I would be following something that is factually true. I have given you multiple chances to provide such information and you have failed to attempt to do so, which is quite worrying. You are clearly serious in and passionate about your beliefs, yet when asked why anybody should think what you believe is actually true, your only response is to tell them they already know it is? Sounds like a faith that has not been very well examined
    1
  291.  @ShanqDad  I provided proof for my reasoning that all Christians cherry pick, as I would be expected to when making a claim. You have not provided any evidence that God is real and you still haven't, just maintained that I apparently know it to be true. This is just sad now. You have invested this time into a discussion and are unable to provide a single piece of evidence for God's existence. You say this is for other people to see. There is no reason that any reasonable person would believe in God based on what you have said as you have not offered them a single reason to
    1
  292.  @youtubeisdud2645  How do you know they don't believe in the true gospel?
    1
  293.  @qwertyts  "the fact they can't have reproduce is a medical problem. " Right, and therefore it's God's will that he doesn't want them to reproduce, right? SO he clearly doesn't want them to get married in the church. Yet you are ok with it?
    1
  294.  @qwertyts  Ok, and where would I find the literal word of God?
    1
  295.  @qwertyts  I have a lot of interest in learning. I just see no legitimate reason to think that the bible is the literal word of a deity
    1
  296. Satan's mercenaries? They are Christians too...
    1
  297.  @qwertyts  Every Christian cherry picks from the Bible, progressive Christian or no
    1
  298.  @qwertyts  They most certainly do. It's why there is not a single unified Christian Church
    1
  299.  @qwertyts  And they would say the same about yours, no doubt
    1
  300. "Wild animals". How so?
    1
  301. Why not?
    1
  302.  @talu9477  Every Christians picks and chooses parts of the Bible to follow or to consider more important., not just progressives
    1
  303.  @talu9477  Yeah, as I said, EVERY Christians picks and chooses. So by your definition there are only "lukewarm Christians"
    1
  304.  @talu9477  Ok. Are you cool with owning and beating slaves?
    1
  305. And yet it does support slavery, so forgive me if I don't get my morality from Christianity
    1
  306. We do have a way of telling. Ask them to prove their abilities under test conditions. If they can't, they can't claim to be psychic and can't take money from people anymore
    1
  307. How so?
    1
  308.  @maddienicole7405  Or they don't see any good reason to read it...?
    1
  309.  @maddienicole7405  Exactly. Why be a Christian at all?
    1
  310. Well it's not exactly hard to use the Bible to justify slavery. The Bible condones it
    1
  311. There is just as much proof for psychics as there is for the Christian God
    1
  312. I don't think there's anybody who thinks it's a particularly great experience....
    1
  313. Why wouldn't people come after psychics?
    1
  314. Why?
    1
  315. Yes. Republicans bring it up all the time. Weird they can't think of any more recent examples. Like a Democrat passing the Civil Rights Act....
    1
  316.  @amyharrison4354  You clearly haven't read the Bible then. God is a monster who kills and inflicts pain upon countless people. The fact that you seem unaware of this is quite worrying
    1
  317.  @amyharrison4354  You are not aware that in the Bible God kills and tortures a great number of people?
    1
  318.  @nicholasgee9127  How do you know?
    1
  319.  @nicholasgee9127  How does that show that they "don't love Christ"?
    1
  320.  @nicholasgee9127  How do you know that?
    1
  321.  @nicholasgee9127  What teachings are they not submitting to?
    1
  322. Basically every resident of a nation with universal healthcare who has looked on in morbid fascination as the U.S continues to somehow fail to adopt it, would disagree with you
    1
  323.  @xniks101x  I am from the U.K and that sounds a highly unusual situation to occur. I would imagine there were more factors at play than your short summary suggested
    1
  324.  @xniks101x  I can see a comment but something has clearly gone wrong. Most of it is nonsensical
    1
  325.  @xniks101x  Ok. I can't speak to the specifics of this one case. You haven't made it clear if your mother is a U.K resident for example, was it that there wasn't a suitable doctor on staff, is that because of the location of hospital etc. And I am unaware of the seriousness of a detached retina. It seems if there was significant genuine threat of blindness in the next 24 hours then she would have been treated if possible. But I still don't see how this is indicative of a problem with the NHS as a whole. No system is perfect, there will be issues. But how does this one situation reflect that the system as a whole is worse than the current U.S system?
    1
  326. Not really. It's the difference between what we know to be real and what people claim to be real
    1
  327.  @baseballfan69  How do you know that?
    1
  328.  @baseballfan69  And what proof do you have that it is real?
    1
  329.  @baseballfan69  Ok. So what is some of that evidence?
    1
  330.  @baseballfan69  Whatever out of the "hundreds of years of evidence, research and knowledge" you find to be the most compelling proof of the legitimacy of astrology
    1
  331.  @baseballfan69  And your own experiences are enough to prove astrology true? How do we go about verifying that?
    1
  332.  @baseballfan69  So how do we verify these experiences as genuine proof of the legitimacy of astrology?
    1
  333. To be fair, somebody doesn't really need a good reason to be atheist. Everybody is atheist by default. Theists require a good reason for their belief
    1
  334. We're fine, thanks
    1
  335. Says who?
    1
  336. How does one "look like an atheist"?
    1
  337.  @Frindow  And what does that look like?
    1
  338.  @maksiono1488  Wow, 17?! I didn't realize I was speaking to an authority on the matter. Tell me, what were there shared defining characteristics?
    1
  339.  @alldayrj2k_939  He is gay and he knows it, that's why he has chosen to remain celibate. He admitted it in the video
    1
  340. Why would you think that?
    1
  341. Who are you to determine who is a "true" believer?
    1
  342. I don't get it. If you are referencing the current situation, I am pretty sure everybody believes all lives matter
    1
  343. Why shouldn't they be allowed to get married in church?
    1
  344.  @norabacsi3302  Why would God think homosexuality is a sin? So if a couple are biologically unable to have children, in your eyes they shouldn't marry? How cruel
    1
  345.  @norabacsi3302  So why can't a homosexual couple receive God's blessing?
    1
  346. Huh?
    1
  347. But he is a pastor.....
    1
  348.  @BDUFFY404  Why would you think that?
    1
  349. It's more nuanced than that and you know it
    1
  350. Really? How do you know?
    1
  351. Why not?
    1
  352. It's true, they're not mutually exclusive. However you can't deny that is also a narrative somewhat pushed by the Republican party themselves. Much like the assumption that if you are Republican you are also Christian
    1
  353. Are you referring to a specific "sin" here?
    1
  354.  @godswarrior711  Which one is that?
    1
  355.  @godswarrior711  That's a sin? Why?
    1
  356.  @godswarrior711  But why should it be considered a sinful act?
    1
  357.  @godswarrior711  How is not natural? homosexuality occurs throughout nature. No new life can be born of it? So an infertile married couple are living in sin? Tell me, have you ever eaten shellfish, touched a football or worn polyester?
    1
  358. @Çaesar "The Entire World's calendar is based off of Jesus Christ". What on Earth does that have to do with anything?
    1
  359. @Çaesar Not even close to evidence and is one of the most absurd attempts at providing evidence I think I have heard. First, the whole BC/AD thing wasn’t used even in Europe until about 800 years after Jesus had died. Second, while most scholars agree that a historical figure of likely Jesus did exist, it’s not proven. And scholars doubt that he was born in the year 0. Most believe he was born between 6 and 4 BC, so, all the years are off. Third, the reason that most of the world uses BC and AD (or BCE and CE) has nothing to do with whether Jesus existed, but with the fact that Europe was dominant for a long while and that it makes sense to have one system internationally or else there will be chaos. (For a small example, witness the confusion around the different adaptations of the Gregorian calendar). Fourth, we use all sorts of terms - in particular for calendar things - that are based on other Gods. So, if the fact that the world uses BC and AD means Jesus existed, then the fact that we use Wednesday and Thursday means that Woden and Thor existed
    1
  360. Well it is often said that "Religion = Cult + Time"
    1
  361. Huh?
    1
  362. Because atheists have never read the Gospels.....?
    1
  363. " you do not have the right to be mad at someone that feels they have to stay true to their religion" I mean, I certainly do. If somebody votes blindly against something for no other reason than they feel an old book tells them to, denying somebody else their rights in the process, seems they have a right to be angry at them
    1
  364. I don't know any atheists who would say they "hate" God, mostly for the reasons you highlighted. You can't hate what doesn't exist. That actually tends to be a question posed to atheists by believers. They ask us "Why do you hate God?" because their assumption seems to be that the only reason somebody would not believe in or reject God is due to some visceral emotional reaction, when it is usually rather for intellectual reasons.
    1
  365. Says who?
    1
  366. The astronomers, as reasonable people of science recognizing the importance of immunization in this time? I would imagine so, yes
    1
  367. A country can't be sustained on universal healthcare and a woman's right to choose? There's plenty of countries that have both of those
    1
  368. Well, it was God's fault though
    1
  369.  @amogussus4397  God is considered to be omniscient, yes. Do you believe that God is also infallible? Is incapable of error or being proven wrong?
    1
  370.  Opossum Teeth  I am aware. I am not claiming such a God exists, but merely the concept most often used as a means to have a further discussion.
    1
  371.  @amogussus4397  Ok, so God knows everything. He knows every choice I will make. So if I have two choices "A" and "B" and God knows I will choose "A", how can you argue I have free will to choose "B"? If I choose "B" then God has just made a mistake, I have proven him wrong.
    1
  372.  @amogussus4397  It doesn't make sense. I am not suggesting god is intentionally forcing anybody down any one path or choice. But if by nature he is omniscient and infallible, then I as a limited fallible being am powerless to choose anything other than what he knew I would, for to do so would weaken God. His very nature limits our choice and therefore free will is impossible if such a God exists
    1
  373.  @amogussus4397  Well you are not explaining it, you are simply asserting it. Whereas I have explained how free will is entirely incompatible with God. Unless you can demonstrate some flaw in my reasoning or provide an alternative explanation, you must understand that I cannot accept your mere assertion that both an all knowing infallible God and free will are compatible
    1
  374.  @amogussus4397  ""If he/she doesn't select that comment then I will smite them down!" I know. I already told you that I am not saying that god is actively choosing to compel people to one choice over another. But if God knows I will choose A, and I choose B, I have proven God wrong, right? Am I, a mere human, capable of causing God to be in error?
    1
  375.  @amogussus4397  You could definitely make me agree with you if you could either present a more convincing argument or point out the flaws in my reasoning. If you can't find flaws in my argument I suggest you reevaluate your own stance on the matter. The philosophical arguments based around the existence of God and free will are very interesting and worth a read Thanks for your time
    1
  376. A free thinking one?
    1
  377. True. The Satanic Temple actually has pretty humanist tenets for its member to follow
    1
  378.  @nicholasgee9127  The Democrats have just elected a literal Pastor as Senator....
    1
  379. How are they not?
    1
  380. Why does it matter to you if they are gay or not? Let people live their life dude
    1
  381. What true god?
    1
  382.  @anon4797  So you claim to love everybody, but quote a bible verse declaring somebody should be put to death because of who they love. Disgraceful
    1
  383. Because you think she looks better under red lighting?
    1
  384. Really? Why would you think that?
    1
  385. What's a "libtard"?
    1
  386. Science not knowing something doesn't mean that you can fill the gaps with what ever unfounded spiritual explanations you like though.
    1
  387.  @alexandradorman3034  So why should trust a spiritual explanation that claims to have answers science does not, if it has zero evidence to back it up, as in the case of astrology?
    1
  388. What do you mean?
    1
  389. Why does that make them not Christian?
    1
  390. What aspects of his presidency are you proud of"?
    1
  391. Says who?
    1
  392. For accepting Gay marriage? Why not?
    1
  393. How so? She gave no indication of having any psychic abilities
    1
  394. Who are you to determine who is or is not Christian?
    1
  395. Big bang being wrong does not mean God therefore automatically exists.....
    1
  396.  @sams_under_ale  Says who?
    1
  397.  @sams_under_ale  No it doesn't. Why would you think that? Please elaborate
    1
  398.  @sams_under_ale  Ok. So explain why. Why is it impossible?
    1
  399.  @sams_under_ale  I don't know. But neither do you. You are stating something cannot come from nothing. Have you ever experienced absolute nothing? As it would have been then, no time, no space, pure nothing? Because unless you have, how can you state what is possible in such a situation?
    1
  400. Every Christian thinks they have the correct interpretation of the Bible. That is why there are so many sects and denominations. The fact remains that none of them have proved their position to be correct
    1
  401.  @noahquiles5791  Then "those who let the Bible govern itself" should be able to prove to everybody that they alone have the correct method fore reading/interpretation of the Bible, right?
    1
  402. Not really. An example of an oxymoron would be "Creationist Science"
    1
  403.  @stephen1878  What were you attempting to say?
    1
  404.  @stephen1878 ?
    1
  405.  @stephen1878  I assume this is another terrible attempt at humour, but doesn't really work when the comments are 4 weeks apart Stephen....
    1
  406.  @stephen1878  And what side is that?
    1
  407.  @stephen1878  And yet the joke you just attempted to make was completely illogical
    1
  408. Just because people used it doesn't mean it works.
    1
  409.  @ejm821  So who decides the correct interpretation of these allegories and usages of symbolism?
    1
  410.  @ejm821  Exactly, different sects with different interpretations and viewpoints. Leaving the viewpoints of progressive Christians just as valid as any other Christian
    1
  411.  @ejm821  And who decides what makes more sense in the greater context of the Bible?
    1
  412. Well, yeah. That's how religion works
    1
  413.  @Florianuus  Why not?
    1
  414. Haha good one
    1
  415.  @notishope  The God of the Bible? Really? If you say so. Then if God is love he supports two loving people of the same gender entering into a relationship with one another. Problem solved
    1
  416.  @notishope  How is a same-sex relationship "redefining love"?
    1
  417.  @notishope  Who says it can't?
    1
  418.  @notishope  How do you know there is God and what it is they say?
    1
  419.  @notishope  Are you familiar with Descartes' "Cogito ergo sum"? Also, why are you just answering my question with another one and deflecting?
    1
  420.  @notishope  Descartes said nothing about "let there be light". You asked how I know there's a me, I shared with you a prominent philosophical argument related to it. I am not avoiding the truth, if anything I seem to have put more effort into informing myself on philosophical and theological matters than you have
    1
  421.  @notishope  The beginning to all understanding is not God... And perhaps if you presented actual arguments instead of mere platitudes, I would take your assertion that I need to open my eyes more seriously
    1
  422.  @notishope  So you have no actual arguments then. Why do you believe all things must start with God? Why do you believe a God exists? If you don't have a solid basis for your belief you have no grounds upon which to say these things to me
    1
  423.  @notishope  So when invited to share why it is you believe in God, you can't even do that? I really have no reason to trust your claims then
    1
  424.  @notishope  So you trust the Bible to be the word of God?
    1
  425.  @notishope  So what word of god exists "apart from the Bible" exactly?
    1
  426.  @notishope  I asked you what word of God exists outside the Bible and you respond with quotes from the Bible...? Jesus has not trumped any other religion. There is just as little evidence for the existence of the Christian God aa therebis for any other deity
    1
  427.  @notishope  They didn't answer anything. You actually seem incapable of answering direct questions and instead going on long rants that actually say very little
    1
  428.  @notishope  I never said the message is foolish. I said that the manner in which you seek to spread the message is bordering on nonsensical and has failed to actually address any of the questions I asked of you
    1
  429.  @notishope  So your admitting your actual ntent is that I hear the message but never understand? What a terrible Christian you are
    1
  430.  @alexmercer936  I don't recall Jesus ever even directly mentioning homosexuality. In what verse does Jesus condemn it?
    1
  431. You don't think the truth of spiritual beliefs deserve examination?
    1
  432.  @aubreyarchives  I am confused. If you can't prove some of the beliefs of astrology, then how did people even arrive at these beliefs to begin with? How did they establish these connections? And of course humanity should be focused on facts. If the claims of astrology are true, we as a species need to completely reevaluate our understanding of the cosmos. It's a huge claim. Anybody stating it's true should be able to prove as such
    1
  433.  @aubreyarchives  And I would question anybody who claimed those belief systems were true as we ll. It makes perfect sense to put them against each other. Astrologers are making truth claims relating to certain celestial bodies, so they are matched with experts on the cosmos
    1
  434.  @aubreyarchives  I am not trying to win you over as such. Just stating why I think it is fair to match these two.
    1
  435. How so?
    1
  436.  @cameronbritton685  So it's just the religion brainwashing you then
    1
  437.  @cameronbritton685  And those with similar beliefs, organize into a religion and then brainwash others into following it
    1
  438.  @cameronbritton685  Not necessarily. But you asserted that there are no brainwashed Christians. That is simply not true
    1
  439.  @cameronbritton685  Only those who would take the Bible literally
    1
  440.  @cameronbritton685  Well, yes
    1
  441. Who does?
    1
  442. You love all religions, you just think yours is the only correct one?
    1
  443.  @dyezmordz6390  Too late for what?
    1
  444.  @dyezmordz6390  Cast down? To hell? Doesn't sound like a very loving God
    1
  445.  @dyezmordz6390  He sacrificed his son to save us from the punishment that he would inflict on us, and we should be thankful? And how can you say that sending somebody to hell is the act of a loving God?
    1
  446. Says who?
    1
  447. What is that going to achieve?
    1
  448.  @lazr9672  Why is that a scientific impossibility?
    1
  449.  @lazr9672  I didn't tell you that you had to believe what I believe. I was asking how you have determined that it is a scientific impossibility that nothing created everything. You still haven't demonstrated how it is impossible. Could you do so please?
    1
  450.  @lazr9672  I don't understand how that demonstrates the scientific impossibility of nothing creating everything. Please elaborate
    1
  451. How is it a contradiction?
    1
  452. How so?
    1
  453. Psychics, astrologers etc have caused proven harm by preying on the vulnerable and gullible for financial gain.
    1
  454. Well what was the context for her laughing?
    1
  455. Not at all. Only disgrace here is you
    1
  456.  @sandisom23  Show me one verse of Christ condemning Homosexuality
    1
  457.  @sandisom23  Ok, so no verse from Christ? The figure CHRISTians are trying to emulate. Interesting you quote Leviticus though. Have you ever eaten pork?
    1
  458.  @sandisom23  Can't tell if you actually read my previous comment or you have just continued on a multi-comment rant....
    1
  459.  @sandisom23  Still ignoring me. Have you ever eaten pork?
    1
  460. @Nahema Yes what?
    1
  461. @Nahema Ok, but I wasn't talking to you. Are you claiming to hold the same views as the person I was addressing?
    1
  462. @Nahema So why is that that you would condemn homosexuality using Leviticus but not yourself for eating pork, also in Leviticus
    1
  463. @Nahema He "sanctified pork"? When did that happen?
    1
  464. @Nahema Sure you will....
    1
  465.  @DragonairbenderCannons  Where is the mention of pork specifically?
    1
  466.  @DragonairbenderCannons  I don't see mention of the word food there either. Seems like you are interpreting the verse so you are able to do what you want, eat pork. Something the progressive Christians are being accused of doing
    1
  467. Depending on the kind of Satanist there is, there is a very good chance that he doesn't worship a literal Satan, or indeed believe that Satan is actually real
    1
  468. You mean we should just dismiss the Old Testament?
    1
  469. Says who?
    1
  470.  @renn9807  Where?
    1
  471.  @renn9807  I see a verse where a man offers his own two virgin daughters to a mob of random men to protect some strangers. That's messed up
    1
  472.  @renn9807  What context is there that justifies a father offering his daughters' virginities to random men in order to protect complete strangers?
    1
  473.  @renn9807  Yeah, fathers were also just free to sell their daughters into slavery. What a wonderful book!
    1
  474.  @renn9807  It is likely that not everybody gave their daughters away. But that does nothing to change the fact that the Bible permits it. It remains horrific. You seem oddly accepting of a good and moral God permitting the selling of young girls into slavery
    1
  475. How odd
    1
  476. You ever eaten shellfish or worn synthetics fabrics?
    1
  477. What are the stereotypes of a Satanist?
    1
  478. Both sides are NOT valid
    1
  479.  @wilsonfevans  Not at all. One is a science grounded in fact, one is a pseudoscience that is not. One deals in truth, the other does not
    1
  480.  @hipnclassic3101  Oh yeah. It's an interesting read. Why would you think it details God's law though?
    1
  481.  @hipnclassic3101  But why should anybody take what it says literally?
    1
  482.  @hipnclassic3101  When did I say I don't believe in a soul/spirit?
    1
  483. How were they mean?
    1
  484.  @Umpa_official  Well no, there's many Bibles and holy books, many interpretations of every one of them, all claiming truths about a multitude of Gods and realities. The fact is none of them can prove they are correct, so you are unable to claim any one view you have of what is to be Christian is more correct than the view of somebody else
    1
  485.  @Umpa_official  It's completely Christians vs Christians. It's Christians who think the bible can be interpreted and those who think it can't. Both Christians, neither one able to prove they are correct and the other is not
    1
  486.  @Umpa_official  Christianity, as it is not grounded in fact, is pretty much whatever somebody wants it to be, since one believer can not prove in any way that their version of the belief is in any way "more correct" than another's
    1
  487. Not really a genuine prediction though
    1
  488. @That's Life I'm confused. Do you deny white privilege exists?
    1
  489. @That's Life Oh. How so? I don't see how you can deny it exists
    1
  490. @That's Life Dude, I am literally a white guy living in one of the most homogeneous non-white societies in the world, and I still see examples of my white privilege here...
    1
  491. @Çaesar How does anybody?
    1
  492. And who are you to judge the level of their faith?
    1
  493.  @kelysleiva5888  Based on what? Who are you to determine their motivations?
    1
  494.  @kelysleiva5888  Well every Christian picks and chooses and interprets. You are in no position to judge their version of Christianity any less valid since no version has been proven to be correct
    1
  495.  @kelysleiva5888  And how are progressives acting in a manner that is not reflective of Christ?
    1
  496.  @kelysleiva5888  He is. So?
    1
  497.  @kelysleiva5888  Yep. Have you?
    1
  498.  @kelysleiva5888  God made marriage? Why would you say that?
    1
  499.  @kelysleiva5888  I am fine, thanks. Are you ok? I asked a relatively simple question
    1
  500.  @kelysleiva5888  I am asking why you would think God created marriage and set certain boundaries and limitations upon it?
    1
  501.  @deformedchild5547  And what are you basing that on....?
    1
  502. A spirit?
    1
  503.  @devynpanchal7612  Why would plenty of atheists be familiar with the Bible?
    1
  504. Such as?
    1
  505.  @nicolewalker8326  Right, but the difference is in a society everybody collectively agrees to follow the laws and will change laws once they no longer work or are socially irrelevant. The way you are describing God makes him sound likena dictator who says "Do as I say or suffer". Why would you worship such a being?
    1
  506. How so?
    1
  507.  @MrBenji-si6db  Why would make them not Christians?
    1
  508.  @MrBenji-si6db  Ok, so how does that make them not Christians?
    1
  509. What do you mean? There are literally liberal, progressive Christians present in this video
    1
  510.  @JHL751  Why are you concerning yourself with the Bible when there are literally examples of the two present in a video right in front of you...?
    1
  511.  @JHL751  I don't know. Are you suggesting then that there is only one, correct kind of Christian?
    1
  512.  @JHL751  I did answer your question, I said I don't know. And nice quote. So how do you explain the multitude of denominations and sects within Christianity?
    1
  513.  @JHL751  Right you shared scripture encouraging believers to be of one mind. And yet Christians are anything but. So how do we determine who is correct?
    1
  514.  @o.o7299  And how do you know what God commands?
    1
  515.  @o.o7299  Right, but how do you know that verse should be believed?
    1
  516.  @JHL751  Or they just have a different opinion on what God's word and will is. Unless you can definitively prove what God's word is and how it is to be understood, then you can't judge the interpretations of others as definitely false.
    1
  517.  @o.o7299  How have you determined it is morally correct. And just because something has a positive outcome doesn't mean the reasoning behind it is true. How do you know the Bible is intended to be taken literally, in its entirety?
    1
  518.  @o.o7299  And if the holy spirit tells one individual one thing is to be taken literally, and a different individual claims it lead them to believe it is open for interpretation?
    1
  519.  @JHL751  How do you know what is it that God said at all?
    1
  520.  @JHL751  How do you know what claims to be God's word is indeed so?
    1
  521.  @o.o7299  So if there is an ambiguous verse, two people pray on it, both claim the holy spirit said different things. How do you decide?
    1
  522.  @o.o7299  Not at all. If the leg doesn't heal then the person who claimed it couldn't was correct
    1
  523.  @o.o7299  How do you know that is indeed God's word?
    1
  524.  @o.o7299  There are no biblical prophecies so convincing that they could only be divine in nature
    1
  525.  @JHL751  I am asking to find truth and specifically trying to find how it is you determine what is true. God's word is direct , there is no hidden meaning? Ok. So you are comfortable worshipping a God who condones slavery?
    1
  526.  @o.o7299  Yes
    1
  527.  @o.o7299  That would be impressive if we had any proof that the Biblical Jesus actually existed and events unfolded as written
    1
  528.  @o.o7299  We do not. Yep, an agnostic atheist
    1
  529.  @o.o7299  I am not saying there is no evidence that the historical figure of Jesus existed. I am saying there is no proof the divine Jesus of the bible did. A gnostic atheist would be somebody who claims with certainty that there is no God. As an agnostic atheist I am not saying that it is a fact God does not exist, but rather that there has thus far been no sufficient evidence to prove he does, and therefore it can't said to be true that he does
    1
  530.  @o.o7299  I would accept any evidence that provided sufficient reason to accept the claim that a divine Jesus existed. Nope. I was raised around it but have never considered myself a follower
    1
  531.  @JHL751  But in the Bible god doesn't free people from slavery. He gives people permission to own and beat their slaves. It's abhorrent
    1
  532.  @JHL751  I have read Exodus. It permits the beating of slaves without punishment as long as the slave does not die. I see no video link
    1
  533.  @JHL751  I have read jt and understood it. What are you suggesting I have wrong? Nope. Nobody is perfect.
    1
  534.  @JHL751  Exodus 21:20-21 King James Version 20 And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall be surely punished. 21 Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he is his money. Bible permits beating of slaves. I have nothing wrong here. And I have already told, there is no video link from you here
    1
  535.  @JHL751  This is my 3rd time telling you now, there is no link in this comments section. You clearly think you have posted one, but I have already told you and am telling you again, I do not see one
    1
  536.  @JHL751  For what purpose? What have I gotten wrong about the verse in Exodus? Just tell me that
    1
  537.  @JHL751  No you didn't. If you did address that verse could you perhaps copy and paste it here so I can see what I missed?
    1
  538.  @JHL751  If you posted it in the same comment as this apparent link, then I can't see it. Possibly because you posted a link, YouTube may have blocked it. I see no comment from you 50 minutes ago. There is the comment where I quoted the verse and then the next comment of yours I see simply says: "You have not read the bible entirely, watch the clip I sent you"
    1
  539. I am confused. What historical facts and evidence are there to prove the divine claims of the Bible?
    1
  540.  @Florianuus  When did that happen? Must have passed me by
    1
  541. @Çaesar We have had this discussion before Caesar and you left em hanging. I showed to you exactly where God condones slavery, including the beating of them, and asked you to provide a single verse from the Bible explicitly condemning the act of slavery. You failed to do so
    1
  542. What do atheists have wrong?
    1
  543. And who decides the participants?
    1
  544. Who is "we"?
    1
  545.  @desecrator8979  You consider yourself a "real christian"? How did you come to such a conclusion?
    1
  546.  @adriana12995  Right. I believe you stated this to me previously. And when I pointed out to you that included condoning slavery you suddenly stopped replying...
    1
  547.  @adriana12995  Imagine I have founded a new country. Within this new country's laws, nowhere does it say that murder is a crime. There are however guidelines about the best manner in which to commit murder, best weapon to use, who is best to murder etc. There is nothing commanding murder or actively encouraging it. But it is clear to any reasonable person that my new nation condones and does not condone or forbid murder. The Bible is the same. There are guidelines on where to buy slaves, passing slaves on to your children, how one can acceptably beat their slaves. And there is no single passage clearly and directly condemning slavery. God is sure to condemn murder, theft, adultery and of course, the very important sin of worshiping any God other than him. But clearly doesn't see slavery as an evil deserving of a single line of condemnation. The Bible clearly condones slavery and if you believe the bible to be true and unchanging, then you should also find slavery acceptable. Do you?
    1
  548.  @adriana12995  Yes, God wanted his chosen people freed. He then gave those people instructions and guidelines on owning slaves, including separate instructions for if the slave is an Israelite. They are not simply detailing laws of the time. They are clear guidlines and edicts about how one can purchase and treat their slaves. To pretend otherwise highlights either a disingenuous attitude on your part or an ignorance of the passages in question. Where in the Bible is there a passage where God directly condemns slavery as he does with a multitude of other sins?
    1
  549. I honestly find it odd that in America many feel forced to identify as one or the other. It's the problem with a 2 party system. My country has multiple parties across a spectrum and so I have never described myself with a party label, and have voted for different parties at different elections depending on their stance at the time
    1
  550. How so?
    1
  551. How are homosexual feelings sinful? What demonstrable harm is caused by two people of the same sex entering into a loving relationship?
    1
  552. @Çaesar You are suggesting the Bible is true?
    1
  553.  @BuildingApologetics  By showing that even Christians can't agree upon what it is their religion claims
    1
  554.  @BuildingApologetics  Except those claiming the text to be genuine and to be taken literally have not proven that claim either. So a progressive take on Christianity remains just as valid as anybody else's
    1
  555.  @BuildingApologetics  And after all that is done, you arrive at the conclusion that the Christian God exists?
    1
  556.  @BuildingApologetics  What evidence is there for a personal creator God?
    1
  557.  @michaelcollins8328  Do they? I don't know of anybody who wants to move to the U.S unless they are already in a terrible situation
    1
  558.  @michaelcollins8328  That's a joke, right? An impression of a Republican who doesn't understand what Communism is...?
    1
  559.  @michaelcollins8328  Sure you do buddy. Just another hyperbolic American right winger it seems
    1
  560. Just trying to get a rise out of people or you are genuinely just ignorant of the discussion nowadays?
    1
  561. Fox News is neutral?
    1
  562.  @g7fford354  Sorry, but they clearly have a bias. Don't get me wrong, pretty much every media outlet does, but claiming they are "neutral" is absurd
    1
  563. Says who?
    1
  564.  @javiervelasquez6478  The Bible says plenty of stuff that Christians all over the world interpret differently and pick and choose as they like. If you claim the Bible is against homosexuality and somebody else says it's not, how do you determine who is correct?
    1
  565.  @Somtejesstudios  Which comment of mine is that in reference to?
    1
  566.  @javiervelasquez6478  You didn't answer my question. If somebody says the Bible forbids it, and somebody else says it doesn't, how do you determine who is correct?
    1
  567.  @javiervelasquez6478  So you believe that unlike others you have the correct, exact understanding of the Bible? How did you arrive at that knowledge?
    1
  568.  @javiervelasquez6478  How odd, my comment has been hidden. I will try again. You believe the laws of Leviticus still apply?
    1
  569.  @javiervelasquez6478  So anybody who eats shellfish is also not a Christian? Also why are you calling me sir?
    1
  570.  @javiervelasquez6478  Ok, did you perhaps miss my last comment during all of your posting?
    1
  571.  @javiervelasquez6478  I am not without words. I asked you some questions. "So anybody who eats shellfish is also not a Christian? Also why are you calling me sir?"
    1
  572.  @javiervelasquez6478  Leviticus forbids the eating of Shellfish. If you believe that you cannot be gay and Christian because Leviticus forbids it, you must be equally angry about those who eat shellfish yet have the audacity to call themselves Christian, right?
    1
  573.  @javiervelasquez6478  Did you just delete a load of your comments? Including the one where you said Leviticus still applied today....
    1
  574.  @javiervelasquez6478  You most definitely did. In fact you can scroll up and see. I asked you. "You believe the laws of Leviticus still apply?" and you immediately responded "Yes sir".
    1
  575.  @javiervelasquez6478  Oh so you are just cherry-picking which verses of Leviticus still apply?
    1
  576.  @javiervelasquez6478  So it applies because it mentions it in other books. So if Leviticus doesn't count, why bring it up in the first place?
    1
  577.  @javiervelasquez6478 So why bring up Leviticus in the first place?
    1
  578.  @javiervelasquez6478  But you just said that the rules of Leviticus are not to be followed anymore. So why bring them up now?
    1
  579. Surely that could be said of all Christians?
    1
  580. And what would one find upon doing research?
    1
  581. There's literally 6 of them....
    1
  582. How so?
    1
  583.  @rambo_4_christ7  How do you know? Have you perhaps received Education in ancient Hebrew? No they don't. It's called IVF. Plenty of couples, both heterosexual and homosexual have used it to get pregnant. It is perfectly pro-life to be homosexual. Again, many gay couples are raising children perfectly well and happily. What is "unnatural" about two consenting adults entering a loving relationship?
    1
  584.  @rambo_4_christ7  I asked you what is unnatural about it? What is wrong with it? What harm is caused by two adults entering into a loving relationship with one another?
    1
  585.  @rambo_4_christ7  It's possibly not deleted, but may have been flagged as potentially inappropriate and held for review. Not exactly a good sign for you though....
    1
  586.  @rambo_4_christ7  Or you are being censored for hate speech. Slightly worrying that you are unable to tell me what the harm is with a gay relationship without it being flagged as inappropriate
    1
  587.  @womped5645  "God is the creator of science"? What on earth is that supposed to mean?
    1
  588. Why?
    1
  589. You believe every word of the Bible is literally true and the word of God?
    1
  590.  @DSPAudiolab  So you believe slavery is acceptable, as the Bible does?
    1
  591.  @DSPAudiolab  The Bible allows the owning of people as property, permits the beating of them, the passing of slaves to your children and the taking of Prisoners of War into slavery. You are ok with all of that?
    1
  592.  @kurtiscooper7607  There are tons of contradictions, as early as Genesis. Like Genesis 1:25-27 and Genesis 2:7-19: And if neither answer can be tested or confirmed? Or both can?
    1
  593. Not really. There are myths and superstitions shared across many cultures. Doesn't mean there's any actual truth to them
    1
  594.  @self.destructr  If it is not grounded in fact and clear demonstrable evidence it is most definitely comprised of mere myths and superstitions. And much as many cultures practicing it doesn't mean it is in any way true, famous figures throughout history being associated with it also does not
    1
  595.  @Sireninlace  It's a "proven fact" psychics are real? Haha good one
    1
  596. Do you not consider certain fictional figures to be good or evil based upon their personalities, actions etc?
    1
  597.  @mosesgebremichael2723  No, it was the University of Maryland
    1
  598.  @mosesgebremichael2723  Why a high chance?
    1
  599.  @greenergrass4060  Why?
    1
  600.  @StevenMorrell7  What do you mean liberals don't understand the policies of the Democrat party?
    1
  601. Who?
    1
  602.  @BryCena27  When did he say he wasn't happy?
    1
  603.  @BryCena27  How so?
    1
  604.  @ivanmeouch95  "There's nothing wrong with slavery"......? Wow dude. That's messed up.
    1
  605. Do you follow everything the Bible says? Accept as moral and immoral what the Bible claims?
    1
  606. I cannot imagine ever sitting down and writing a sentence like this. Please explain your thought process
    1
  607. @Çaesar And they are probably not a Real Scotsman either, right Caesar?
    1
  608. @ÇaesarIt is making reference to a well known logical fallacy that you are committing
    1
  609. @Çaesar Just google "No True Scotsman".
    1
  610. @Çaesar You stated an opinion and in doing so committed a well know logical fallacy. Not surprising
    1
  611. @Çaesar Please lay out to me then how you have factually determined that the OP was likely never a real member of their church
    1
  612. @Çaesar Bit odd you would attempt to imply I am ignorant of the subject matter when this whole conversation was started by me having to direct you to research the well known (and at this point rather cliche) logical fallacy you were committing... You haven't proven anything. Renouncing Christianity means no longer a Christian. Fine, pretty obvious. But you were arrogant enough to attempt to tell the OP that "You probably were never part of the church to begin with." So how are you going to factually show, that you have determined this perfect stranger to you, at NO point throughout their entire faith journey, was ever truly committed to their church and a believer with all their heart?
    1
  613. @Çaesar 1. I told you exactly which fallacy you were committing at the exact moment you did it, long before you started posting scriptures. Did you not look it up? Or did you perhaps not understand it? 2. I didn't lie about anything. You indicated you would return later with a justification for Biblical slavery and you never did, literally engaging me in a different conversation on another comment without resolving that discussion. 3. They never said they renounced Christianity, they said they left their Church. And that is irrelevant to the claim you have made. As I have said to you previously, the question is not whether or not they are a member of their church now. You stated "You probably were never part of the church to begin with.", which leaves me asking you yet again, how are you going to factually show, that you have determined this perfect stranger to you, at NO point throughout their entire faith journey, was ever truly committed to their church and a believer with all their heart?
    1
  614. @Çaesar 1. Right, so you clearly either haven't looked up the fallacy or didn't understand it or you would be aware of how you have committed it. Do you need me to explain it you dear? 2. If you posted something I never saw it, and as the original comment has now been deleted I am unable to go back and check. You seem to have been quite wounded by this accusation of mine. If you want me to read that comment feel free to type it out again and try to defend slavery as acceptable. 3. I do indeed. The definition you would be using doesn't alter the fact that you would still be committing a logical fallacy and that you STILL haven't provided any evidence of how you factually know that they NEVER truly believed with all of their heart. For the 3rd time now, are you able to prove that?
    1
  615.  @dmx7280  There is photographic evidence of kids being kept in similar "cages" under the Obama administration. But that was either with their families or they were unaccompanied minors. The horrific act of actually separating kids from their parents was started under Trump
    1
  616.  @dmx7280  That is not the case at all. I have even just checked all the announcements made about the policy. Nothing is said about only separating children from people who can't prove their parentage. Instead it is spoken of as a deterrent, that anybody crossing with their kids can have them taken away. And can't help but notice how quickly you have gone from asserting it was Obama's policy to now trying to defend it as a Trump policy....
    1
  617.  @DarkSektori  And assuming that all atheists believe it is yours
    1
  618. Why?
    1
  619. Why?
    1
  620. How so?
    1
  621.  @unfortunatelyaspursfan9823  Ok. So even if society accepts something if the Bible says it's wrong, it's wrong. And vice versa?
    1
  622.  @unfortunatelyaspursfan9823  So modern Christian should be ok with slavery? The Bible condones it and never condemns it
    1
  623.  @unfortunatelyaspursfan9823  That's the excuse I often hear. People were bought, they were not free to leave, and they were allowed to be beaten by whoever owned them. It was slavery.
    1
  624.  @unfortunatelyaspursfan9823  What does that have to do with anything I said? Are you actually suggesting that it's perfectly ok if you are slave during this lifetime....?
    1
  625.  @unfortunatelyaspursfan9823  I am not taking anything out of context. Everything I described is permitted in the Bible, and slavery is never condemend as bad, or forbidden. So modern Christians should be ok with it, right?
    1
  626. And what happens if two people both claim that the Holy Spirit has given them vastly different understandings of the Bible?
    1
  627.  @mummyanddaughter3732  Ok, so both people ask for the spirit of discernment and both people claim to have been given different truths. How do you know who is correct?
    1
  628.  @mummyanddaughter3732  I can't help you and that is the whole point I have been trying to tell you. There is no one individual who can say with complete certainty that they have the "true" or "correct" understanding of the Bible
    1
  629. Those people seem to believe you can be progressive and Christian. Who are you to tell them what they can believe?
    1
  630. He sacrificed a son, to supposedly fix the problem that he created....
    1
  631. Nah, I'm good thanks
    1
  632. It is abundantly clear you have no idea what modern Satanists actually believe
    1
  633. Correct on one out of 3 there bud
    1
  634.  @MrSexyScottish  Are you actually from Scotland?
    1
  635. Well no, the traditional concept of God renders both his existence and the concept of free will logically incompatible
    1
  636. How so?
    1
  637. There's 3 of them in the video buddy
    1
  638.  @carlosatreides5653  How so? Who are you to judge who is a genuine Christian or not?
    1
  639.  @carlosatreides5653  Ok, and how do you know you have the correct interpretation of that verse, that it is meant to be taken literally, that it was not only meant for that period in time etc?
    1
  640.  @carlosatreides5653  How do you know it's factual? You are arguing that a book claiming to be God's word should be followed exactly, because that same book claims it is God's word.
    1
  641.  @carlosatreides5653  Evidence such as...?
    1
  642.  @carlosatreides5653  That's not proof the Bible is true. That is just an indication of Christians attempting to retroactively apply scientific advancements and discoveries to vague Bible verses And there is no clear, verifiable eye witness testimony of Biblical events and the divine Jesus Christ?
    1
  643.  @carlosatreides5653  Ok. So if you can't prove the Bible is factually true and intended to be taken literally, then you can't claim the position of progressive Christians is any less valid than any other believer
    1
  644.  @carlosatreides5653  That was not evidence. Do you need me to explain why? I thought I had made it clear
    1
  645.  @carlosatreides5653  If you would like to, feel free
    1
  646. ​ @carlosatreides5653  You didn't give anything closely resembling evidence. Let's take your claim about the Bible somehow having divine knowledge of the importance of blood. The view of blood as the essence for life predates the Bible. The Code of Hammurabi from Mesopotamia (about 1727 B.C.E., before Leviticus) has a phrase which translates "to pour out his life-blood like water." In the Enuma Elish, blood was an essential ingredient which mankind was created from. Ugaritic and Egyptian sources also note the importance of blood. That blood is essential to life is not hard to figure out, especially for people who slaughter livestock. Blood is not the essence of life. We would not survive long without lungs, lymph, muscles, nerves, etc. either. Our bones produce blood, but bones are nowhere mentioned or credited in the equation. Some animals are alive without blood at all (jellyfish, sponges, etc.) and plants themselves are alive but do not have blood. Therefore, blood is not the essence of life. Rather, living things are all made of cells, which, when alive, collectively form a living organism. I would accept any sufficiently compelling evidence. Do you actually have any?
    1
  647.  @carlosatreides5653  "You will reject anything given because it doesn't conform to your original premise". That is not fair of you to say at all. I am not simply blindly rejecting things presented to me. I just gave you clear reasoning why an example you presented as only being possible through divine knowledge, does not hold up, did I not?
    1
  648.  @carlosatreides5653  How are they sufficiently dissimilar that my point no longer stands? And you mention nothing of my other examples, all of which predate the Bible and therefore show it is not suitable evidence for the claim you were making. Literally any evidence. I never demanded physical evidence from you. I said I would accept any sufficiently compelling evidence. That could take any form
    1
  649.  @carlosatreides5653  Where in the verse does it directly state that blood provides genetic information as well as information regarding sickness and disease? Well yes, because nothing you have said so far has been convincing. I will not specify exactly what kind of evidence I will accept, because as I have said multiple times now, I am not looking for any one specific kind of evidence. I would accept and indeed be eager to hear of any convincing evidence.
    1
  650.  @carlosatreides5653  Well yes, because you have not stated anything convincing and I have explained to you why it is not. I also gave you a chance to explain to me how it is. I gave you an opportunity in my last comment to justify your claim that my example didn't hold up, to show me where in the verse it directly states that blood provides genetic information etc. Can't help but notice you have ignored that request. I am an agnostic atheist
    1
  651.  @carlosatreides5653  Then the verse would be talking about DNA, not blood. This is you attempting to make more of the verse than there actually is. It is not an oxymoron. It is a well established position within philosophy and theology that sadly far too few people seem to know about. A gnostic atheist would state with 100% certainty that there is not God. This may be because they think the very concept is logically impossible, that science has rendered the idea of a god obsolete etc. An agnostic atheist is somebody who says that there is currently not enough evidence for anybody to claim that a God exists. That does not mean wholeheartedly that there is no God or that no evidence will ever be found. Merely that the claim cannot currently be accepted as true and therefore nobody can state as fact that a God exists. i don't necessarily want a mathematical calculation. As I am forced to repeat yet again, I will accept any genuine evidence, regardless of the form it takes, as long as it holds up to scrutiny.
    1
  652.  @carlosatreides5653  I am not at all confused by those terms, but by all means feel free to let me know how I am. I look forward to being educated on them. I have had to change the word in front each time not to be intentionally dense, but in an effort to help you understand my position as you are still unable to understand a relatively simple position after multiple explanations. I don't know how else to say this. I will accept any evidence that truly shows a God is real or the Bible is true
    1
  653.  @carlosatreides5653  Please elaborate further. And stil enthusiastically waiting to hear how I have been confused about some terms
    1
  654.  @carlosatreides5653  I have studied the Bible and I am perfectly ready and capable to discuss these matters online, having done so with believers many times with no issues. The fact that your only evidence for the existence of God is "The heavens declare the Glory of God" and when asked to expand on that you run away, shows it is you who os not ready. Once you are you can always try messaging me again
    1
  655.  @carlosatreides5653  "Bro"? If there were plenty of evidence that actually proved God's existence we wouldn't be having this discussion. It does explain your position, yes. You are suggesting that the very nature of reality itself points to the existence of a God. I am asking you to elaborate and explain why you would believe that to be the case
    1
  656.  @carlosatreides5653  Because you are claiming a god exists. If that's true, the entirety of makind will have to completely reevaluate every single thing we thought we understood about our reality. It's a huge claim to make. If you genuinely have evidence of course I would want to hear it
    1
  657.  @carlosatreides5653  You are not. But you are the person I am currently engaged in conversation with
    1
  658.  @Nanofuture87  I am not able to buy a gun. I feel in no way any less free than anybody else. In fact I would say I am far more comfortable, not having to fear getting shot any time I step outside my door
    1
  659. But do astrologers claim it is factually true? That is the issue the astronomers likely have and that many do with topics like astrology
    1
  660. If that happened it is probably because groups like the modern Satanic Temple have precepts that value human rights. Honestly agree with them a lot more than the messed up morality of the Bible
    1
  661.  @sunkyokim6052  Except every Christian picks and chooses when it comes to the Bible. Even those who claim they believe it to be literal truth ignore a lot of the nastier parts
    1
  662.  @sunkyokim6052  So how do you know who is not a false pastor?
    1
  663.  @sunkyokim6052  Why would I agree that the Old Testament is God's word? The fact that there is an oral tradition proves nothing about the truth of what was passed down. Also you do know that the synoptic Gospels were not written by those who knew Jesus but decades after his death?
    1
  664.  @sunkyokim6052  The so called prophesies of the bible are not proof that the entirety of the book is true. And the synoptic Gospels are Matthew, Mark, and Luke. I suggest you perhaps look more into who their authors were, for none of them were likely actual apostles of Christ
    1
  665.  @sunkyokim6052  The books are not named after their literal authors. Those names were given to the gospels by the church later on. Pretty much every biblical scholar agrees that the authors were unknown and written a number of decades after the apparent death of Christ. As I said, i really suggest you look into the actual authorship of the Bible
    1
  666.  @lenalove8138  Wow. You think slavery is ok? That's terrible
    1
  667. Every Christian cherry picks the Bible
    1
  668. "You cannot change God's word and his commands to suit your own ideology. " So you consider slavery to be acceptable, as the Bible does?
    1
  669. What do you mean Democrats won't know for a while?
    1
  670.  @jesusislord1560  What Lord? Guide to what?
    1
  671. Huh....?
    1
  672.  @reynarobles4384  Why would I know the history of Planned Parenthood? What am I supposed to be looking for?
    1
  673.  @nicholasgee9127  Yeah, which is horrific. But I can't see any racial aspect to her beliefs that would justify the original poster's claim
    1
  674. They are both gay and choose to follow the teachings of Christianity. Not that complicated
    1
  675.  @Leo-wy1by  Says some Christians. Others say it is not. No way no know who is correct
    1
  676.  @Leo-wy1by  Where does it say that?
    1
  677.  @Leo-wy1by  Ok, but Leviticus says a number of things are forbidden, that modern Christians still do anyway. It is largely dismissed as archaic laws meant for the time
    1
  678. @Manlyman Lad They don't believe they are. And nobody can prove they are wrong to think so
    1
  679. @Manlyman Lad Every Christian places more or less emphasis on rules within the Bible, ignoring them all together. A modern progressive Christian who believes the Bible is merely allegorigal and focuses on what they believe are the positive aspects of the faith, has no more proof they are correct than a Bible literalist
    1
  680. How so?
    1
  681.  @GodofDisco  Sorry, I don't understand. How are porn and masturbation "sexual immorality"?
    1
  682. No he wasn't. Why would you think that?
    1
  683.  @luceliorodrigues7504  Ok...
    1
  684. When have people gotten mad for being told to have a blessed day?
    1
  685. Says who?
    1
  686. What a shining example you are of the problems within American politics
    1
  687.  @sehmmideo5520  "The moon is also 180 times the diameter of the moon"...?
    1
  688.  @sehmmideo5520  I am going to hope you typed that incorrectly, because the way it is written, it is not even remotely close to being true
    1
  689. 1. We know those things have creators. It does not follow that everything on earth has a "beginning, a manual, and a maker" 2. "Who or what made these must be like them is someway. " Why would you think that? 3. "Who or what made us, the plant and animals must be extremely more intelligent than you" "hat caused us to exist must be loving and caring as all of us crave love. " Again, why would you think that?
    1
  690.  @drwn1791  You are making so many unfounded assumptions there. Why do you think you can compare a known man made product, to the entirety of the universe?
    1
  691.  @drwn1791  Again, a comparison that can't be made. You seem to be equating the origin of the very material of the universe, with you or I, already existing lifeforms, simply having children. Doesn't work
    1
  692.  @drwn1791  Not especially. Why?
    1
  693.  @drwn1791  I have never heard of anybody claiming they " originated from an explosion of some organism". Their are plenty of unhappy Christians in the world. Just as there are many people who have hope, a sense of purpose and clear identity with no God required
    1
  694.  @drwn1791  There is not one specifc event or kind of evidence I am looking for. I would accept any evidence that decisively showed a God exsits. This is true of all the athesits I know
    1
  695.  @drwn1791  I don't recall asking for anything...
    1
  696. So every word is to be taken as true and followed exactly? Because there are lot of horrible things in the Bible many Christians like to ignore
    1
  697.  @mcsquigly3342  The Bible's condoning of and failure to condemn slavery
    1
  698.  @mcsquigly3342  This is what every Christian seems to say. But to suggest that the entirety of slavery at the time was "indentured servitude" or "debt slavery" is just not honest. There are verses in the Bible stating that Hebrews should buy their slaves from the tribes around them, and encouraging the taking of prisoners of wars as slaves. It condones owning people as property. It's abhorrent.
    1
  699.  @mcsquigly3342  Leviticus 25:44 "'Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves." Deuteronomy 20:13-14 "When the Lord your God delivers it into your hand, put to the sword all the men in it. As for the women, the children, the livestock and everything else in the city, you may take these as plunder for yourselves." And I really don't like that argument. Slavery is slavery, it doesn't matter how well somebody is treated, they are still considered nothing more than property. And even then you don't seem to full understand the rules you are referencing. The 7 year rule only applied to hebrew men. If you were a women or not Hebrew, you were a slave for life. And even if you were a hebrew man there ways an owner could keep you forever. If during your slavehood your master got you a wife, then when your 7 years were up you had to choose. Go a free man and leave your wife behind in slavery or stay with her forever. Also that same set of rules that you say treated slaves with dignity and respect, allowed the owners to beat their slaves as much as they like, as long as the injuries caused did not cause the slave to die within a couple of days of receiving them. Not a hebrew man, no limits on the beatings you may receive
    1
  700.  @mcsquigly3342  1. So slavery was just temporarily acceptable and morally ok? I am sorry, but I don't think owning another person as property has EVER been acceptable. Do you? 2. You say that you will address more further on, but again, every thing you mentioned here would have only applied to male Hebrew slaves. Everybody else had no such chances 3. That was a TINY portion of the actual slave trade carried out at the time and as I have already pointed out to you, the Bible tells its followers to BUY their slaves from other tribes and to take women and children prisoners of war captive as their slaves. Do you think that is morally acceptable? 4. In that same book, Exodus 21:21 states that a slave owner can beat their slave as the please, as long as the slave doesn't die, for the slave is their property. And AGAIN, that rule would only have applied to male Hebrew slaves. If you were a woman or a foreigner there were no restrictions on the beating you could receive. Do you think that is morally acceptable? 5. It doesn't matter if he had a plan to abolish it eventually. He is supposed to be a perfect moral God. And as I said in response to point 1, I don't believe owning another person as property has ever been acceptable, whether it was intended to be a temporary time in history or not. Do you? 6. You cannot attribute the abolition of slavery to God. If you want to do that, you must also acknowledge that came after a long time where he both condoned slavery and never condemned it, standing back and allowing it to happen, never saying it was wrong.
    1
  701. ​ @mcsquigly3342  1. What would I do in God's place? Not condone slavery! Condemn it, speak out on it for the evil it is, like God was clearly comfortable doing with so many other sins. It doesn't matter if it was a temporary plan or not. God stood by and condoned slavery. It's morally unacceptable. 2. Ok you didn't choose the system. Do you agree with it? Because it's abhorrent 3. They don't have any rights under the biblical laws on slavery... And I can't believe you are actually trying to make excuses for the encouraged abduction of women and children into slavery. 4. God didn't beat them, no. He just created the system that gave permission for them to be beaten. Equally as culpable. 5. So again, defending slavery as somehow necessary. Can't believe I am seeing this in this day and age.
    1
  702. How can somebody hate a figure that didn't exist?
    1
  703. Who says you can't be gay and Christian?
    1
  704. By quoting what the Bible says and what they believe it means, they are showing that they agree with it. They have just told somebody that they believe he is headed to eternal torment in hell and that they agree with that decision. How is that not bashing or insulting somebody?
    1
  705. And who are you to judge who is or is not a false teacher?
    1
  706. It's still slavery. The Bible says that you can take prisoners of war as slaves, you are allowed to beat slaves as long as they don't die, and children born to slaves are automatically your property. It's just as horrific as colonial slavery
    1
  707. So you agree with absolutely every word in the Bible?
    1
  708. Who in this video was mentioning those things excessively and unnecessarily?
    1
  709.  @FuhqEwe  You didn't provide clarity at all. They weren't reminding people every five seconds, they were referencing their sexuality as key informing factors of their faith. Incredibly relevant to the discussion and the video.
    1
  710. ​ @FuhqEwe  You said "They must remind you every five seconds of their sexuality, terms, and ethnicity." as if they are doing so because they are somehow compelled to. That is an unfair aspersion in this case. They only mentioned it because it was relevant to the discussion and important to letting their position in this matter be known. Right?
    1
  711.  @FuhqEwe  How exactly is it not relevant to the discussion then?
    1
  712.  @FuhqEwe  Yes, but MY point is that in the video, referencing their sexuality is not only relevant but likely a necessity. You are saying you would still find it annoying that somebody references their sexuality even if it is relevant and necessary to the conversation at hand?
    1
  713. You seem to be slightly confused, only one of those is a religion
    1
  714.  @TopJazzCat  Really? Please explain to me how Progressivism as you call it and Christianity are both comparable as religions
    1
  715.  @TopJazzCat  Ok, so who or what is the ultimate authority in "progressivism"?
    1
  716.  @TopJazzCat  Clearly. Please enlighten me
    1
  717.  @TopJazzCat  I meant clearly not. My request was sincere. I am unaware of what you mean by "the utterances of the progressives" and would like some clarification
    1
  718.  @TopJazzCat  No I do not, and having expressed that several times now, only for you to keep asking, I am beginning to wonder if you do...
    1
  719.  @TopJazzCat  I know what progressives have to say and thus felt confident in my initial statement. I don't know what ultimate authority they are supposedly appealing to however and still don't know as instead of telling me you have decided to answer my question with another question.
    1
  720.  @TopJazzCat  Right, so you made an odd comment and are now making up excuses after finding that you are unable to elaborate on it when challenged to. Got it.
    1
  721.  @TopJazzCat  I do know about the differences between the world views. That's why it is so odd to hear somebody talking about progressives being united under a religion and appealing to an ultimate authority. I would love to hear that explained further but considering how easily you could have done that by now and how much effort you are putting into doing it, seems reasonable to conclude it is because you are unable to
    1
  722.  @TopJazzCat  And I am still saying I don't know who/what they supposedly appeal to. and you are still not sharing haha. I do not have a sense of entitlement over this. I am just finding it fascinating the lengths you are going to in order to avoid expanding on concepts that YOU raised
    1
  723.  @TopJazzCat  You keep referencing my "prejudice". If you are this hurt and offended by my saying "You seem to be slightly confused" you really should not be entering into any discussions about religion and politics on the internet haha
    1
  724. I don;t understand. Who do you think needs to be more educated on a topic?
    1
  725. Yeah. Why?
    1
  726.  @stephenmains7370  Says who?
    1
  727.  @SarethZhukov314  I can both believe greater gun control is needed and be critical of criminals.
    1
  728.  @benborja3200  Who thinks that?
    1
  729.  @benborja3200  Not at all, they clearly don't agree with your statement
    1
  730.  @benborja3200  Exactly. Look at what they said. They only pointed out your obvious reductivism and misunderstanding. They didn't state anything about how they believe life came into being
    1
  731.  @benborja3200  It's not. As long as the reduced statement accurately reflects what the argument states
    1
  732.  @benborja3200  What are you considering "the faulty view"? And why are you calling me sir?
    1
  733.  @benborja3200  And what is the opposing viewpoint? There must be actual terms you can use to let me know what it is you are referring to? Miss?
    1
  734.  @benborja3200  Well for starters I wouldn't correct Cody. No need. And I would need you to clarify what it was you wanted to refer to as I have seen you refer to both the origins of the universe and to the origins of life. Those are separate topics with separate theories associated with each
    1
  735. Why?
    1
  736. You believe they are actually psychic?
    1
  737.  @GloryBeToGodForever  You seem not to have understood my question. Why should two people of the same gender in a loving relationship be considered a son alongside things such as murder and theft?
    1
  738.  @GloryBeToGodForever  I appreciate the effort you put into your response but you have said essentially the same thing and not answered my question. If somebody commits murder, there is a clear victim and clear demonstrable harm. Same with theft, with your example of drug use depending on the drug clear harm can be done to a person's body, general well being etc. So instead of just asserting that homosexuality is immoral or a sin, please tell me what clear demostrable harm is caused by two people of the same gender entering into a loving relationship with one another.
    1
  739.  @GloryBeToGodForever  Your example of a 17 and 19 year old doesn't hold up. The law they are breaking is one collectively made and agreed upon by society based on collective reasoning and judgement as to what should and should not be permitted. Being in a same sex relationship being wrong just because God arbitrarily says, has no such justifiable reasoning behind it. What health consequences are there of two men being together? There is potential emotional pain in any relationship. And the only way a loved one would be hurt by a family member entering a same sex relationship is if they blindly believe that it is sinful without being able to explain why it is harmful.That is not the relationship itself causing harm, that is the family member's beliefs causing themselves harm. So you still have not explained why it is harmful. You seem to be an intelligent, measured individual. Why would you blindly condemn something as wrong if you can't justify why it is wrong? It just comes down to blindly trusting God? I don't see why it is relevant but I am not in a same sex relationship
    1
  740. That is true, but you recognize that there is a stark difference between somebody making a free choice to not date, have sex etc, and somebody who feels they risk eternity in hell if they do so?
    1
  741.  @kyleduddleston4123  You think context excuses every horrific thing in the Bible?
    1
  742.  @kyleduddleston4123  So the context that excuses slavery for example....?
    1
  743.  @kyleduddleston4123  That is what I always here trotted out as an excuse. Servitude to pay off debts did exist but so did slavery as most people know it. The Bible permits it, along with taking Prisoners of War as your slaves, passing slaves on to your children and the freedom to beat your slave as you please. It's horrific
    1
  744.  @kyleduddleston4123  I understand the Biblical stance on slavery completely. It is condoned and never condemned. It is abhorrent and inexcusable
    1
  745.  @kyleduddleston4123  The Bible never says slavery is bad and literally gives instructions on where your slaves should be purchased, passing them on and acceptable levels of beating them. It condones slavery and never condemns it. Seems you need to study your Bible some more
    1
  746.  @kyleduddleston4123  Oh really? Please elaborate and tell me what exactly I have gotten wrong thus far about slavery in the Bible
    1
  747. Wow, wishing eternal torment on people for not sharing the same belief as you? How abhorrent
    1
  748. So you believe every word of the Bible is literally true?
    1
  749. How so?
    1
  750. The only reason you'll vote for him is because you think it will annoy "the establishment"? Oh dear...
    1
  751. How so?
    1
  752. Why wouldn't a Christian support BLM?
    1
  753. Destroying the Church? I think the church needs more progressive Christians. Otherwise the Church is going to remain stuck in the dark ages and keep seeing declining membership and a lack of relevancy
    1
  754.  @user-sh2rc5kc7x  Then why ask them those questions?
    1
  755. I find it hard to show empathy for those pushing a false narrative that helps promote and industry responsible for taking millions each year from the gullible and grieving
    1
  756. What research?
    1
  757. "I hear the progressive Christians basically saying they do not believe what the bible says in certain instances because they dont emotionally agree with it. " Do you approve of slavery? Because the Bible condones it and never condemns it
    1
  758.  @kelysleiva5888  That's sounding a lot like Pascal's Wager. Not the most convincing of arguments
    1
  759. What difference would it have made?
    1
  760.  @redphoenix9468  I can read. I was just pointing out that I saw no need to for you to clarify that or make the assertion, and that I certainly hadn't prompted it any way. Calm down. Once you have calmed down perhaps you could edit your second comment to actually make it readable so that I can respond to it
    1
  761.  @redphoenix9468  I didn't say you were mad, I merely suggested you calm down. I am starting to realize now that perhaps English may not be your first language. Is that the case and why your comment doesn't make sense?
    1
  762.  @redphoenix9468  "the human brain can read sentences with the two liters taken out of a word". Liters in a word? "When 9/11 is your dumbs gonna be critical of ISlam not" What exactly was that supposes to mean?
    1
  763.  @redphoenix9468  I am not going off topic. I am literally trying to keep you on topic by asking you to clarify exactly what is you meant in a previously unreadable comment. Happy to continue this conversation once you are mature enough to handle it
    1
  764. Why do you have to wait until you're 18 to consider yourself an independent?
    1
  765. Why can't God be a woman?
    1
  766. Wouldn't the simpler more reasonable explanation be that you simply don't like a particular personality trait typically assigned to those of a particular star sign?
    1
  767. What exactly is a "real" Christian then? And who are you to determine it?
    1
  768.  @abbyhyslop6393  That's not what I asked you though.....
    1
  769.  @abbyhyslop6393  So you believe the Bible is the inerrant word of God? Then that means you think slavery is acceptable as the Bible does?
    1
  770.  @abbyhyslop6393  The Bible allows the owning of people as property, permits the beating of them, the passing of slaves to your children and the taking of Prisoners of War into slavery. You are ok with all of that?
    1
  771.  @abbyhyslop6393  " there are some things in the bible we don't have answers for, but I do trust God and know that he is a perfect God and a perfect judge" This is where you and I must be different then. In my eyes there is no perfect God that would condone the acts related to slavery that are in the Bible. If you continue to worship this God knowing those are there and maintaining that the Bible is his inerrant word, then you are also saying that you find those things acceptable.
    1
  772.  @abbyhyslop6393  Do you honestly think there is any answer your pastor can give that would excuse slavery?
    1
  773.  @abbyhyslop6393  So then your position is just one of blind faith? There is an atrocity that you say there is no excuse for, yet you continue to worship the all powerful being who condones it, trusting there must be a reason for it, even though you say it is inexcusable.
    1
  774. No, they mean 6
    1
  775.  @Nameless10949  Lukewarm? What do you mean?
    1
  776. I am ok with that
    1
  777. I agree. Trump is mad racist
    1
  778. I truly hope that God will help you overcome your prejudices, yes
    1
  779. Who believes in baby murder?
    1
  780.  @aaayhvcvb3219  People who are indeed left in a complete vegetative state, usually after an illness or accident, and are considered brain dead, kept alive by machines, are indeed usually taken off those machines, yes
    1
  781. How is he being hypocritical?
    1
  782.  @BrianaB18  Really? I have never found that. Got an example?
    1
  783. Because that's only one way of viewing the Bible and of viewing Christianity.And as it has not being proven to be correct, other stances and interpretations are just as valid
    1
  784. Why?
    1
  785.  @JonathanFromJefferson  True. Odd how so many Christians seem to try and pretend all that stuff isn't in the book
    1
  786.  @kaydencevaldez3733  But that doesn't matter. It doesn't change the fact that all the horrible things within it would have been considered moral at one point by God
    1
  787.  @nicholasgee9127  Really? Where does it say "Thou shalt not be progressive"?
    1
  788.  @lotus9865  Oh. So nothing stopping amynodu being a progressive Christian then
    1
  789.  @nicholasgee9127  Every Christian ignores the parts they don't like
    1
  790.  @nicholasgee9127  Completely true. It's why there's no unified Christian Church
    1
  791.  @lotus9865  No sass intended. Was just genuinely curious what that comment was supposed to achieve. Care to elaborate on it?
    1
  792.  @arcticpangolin3090  Amazing how quickly people go quiet once you force them to actually read Exodus 21, huh?
    1
  793. Says who?
    1
  794.  @corn4me994  I am familiar with both of those. What relevance do they have here?
    1
  795. To be fair lqbtq friendly just = decent human being
    1
  796. Exodus 21: 20-21 ""If a man beats his male or female slave with a rod and the slave dies as a direct result, he must be punished, but he is not to be punished if the slave gets up after a day or two, since the slave is his property."
    1
  797. "God would not ask someone to terminate a life he created", no he would just do it himself on a whim
    1
  798. Like what?
    1
  799. Why?
    1
  800. How are the Democrats advocating for Racism?
    1
  801. Why not?
    1
  802.  @cambellpierce2234  You say it's not your place to judge, but isn't that exactly what you were doing by saying none of them are Christian?
    1
  803.  @cambellpierce2234  Your original comment literally says "I don't think anyone in this game was a christian tbh"....
    1
  804. How so?
    1
  805. So the teachings of Gods, commandments, what is permissible and impermissible, is as true now as it was then?
    1
  806.  @nathanwells586  But even laws that are no longer to be followed, were considered just, moral, necessary etc at the time?
    1
  807.  @nathanwells586  You don't consider God condoning slavery an abomination?
    1
  808.  @nathanwells586  No, the Bible condones and never condemns slavery. It is perfectly permissible according to the Bible
    1
  809.  @nathanwells586  So God allowed his people to practice slavery because his people were partaking in witchcraft and worshiping pagan Gods...? You also said you consider slavery an abomination. Why would you worship a God who condones it?
    1
  810.  @nathanwells586  My second question still stands. If you consider slavery immoral and and abomination, why worship a God who condones it?
    1
  811.  @nathanwells586  We're not talking about Mohammed. It'd really not an issue for you that not once in the only recorded example of his Word, God never condemned slavery?
    1
  812.  @nathanwells586  It matters entirely. It means that you are willing to just brush off slavery, one of the greatest evils mankind has committed, admitting that you have no idea why God would allow it. You are willing to accept an unspeakable evil under the blind faith that God had a reason for it. That's really worrying
    1
  813.  Oucast American  No, but neither does life, so why not enjoy both while you can?
    1
  814.  Oucast American  Why do you think there is anything after our death?
    1
  815.  Oucast American  Well, why do you think there is a God and how do you know what he says?
    1
  816. How so?
    1
  817. @Angel Agbettor Why?
    1
  818.  @texvirgo9847  Why?
    1
  819.  @texvirgo9847  Why wouldn't you see them in heaven?
    1
  820.  @701765  Every Christian creates their own version of God to follow and places their own different importance in different parts of the Bible
    1
  821.  @elliemccreesh6324  You don't consider God's existence fact?
    1
  822.  @elliemccreesh6324  "IF God is not Omnipotent, Omniscient and Omnipresent, then WHO is? " Nobody... Reality is NOT something you create in your mind. By its very dictionary definition, reality is "the world or the state of things as they actually exist, as opposed to an idealistic or notional idea of them." Individuals may have factors that alter their perceptions of reality, but that does not alter what is actually true and real. I don't believe I ever said you were "illogical" for believing in God, what I did ask was why would you live your life as if something is true when you have no reason to believe it is factually so? Good exists whether a God exists or not
    1
  823.  @elliemccreesh6324  Well no, the CONCEPT of God is those things, can't say an actual deity exists possessing those qualities. And throughout your comments, like many apologists, you seem to be frequently creating false dichotomies. Why is that? I am not using a dictionary to attempt to explain how it is we process reality but to point out to you that in that particular instance you were not using the term correctly... There is enough evidence to consider it likely that a historical figure or figures now known as Jesus existed. There is no evidence for his divinity. I am familiar with all the people you listed and also familiar with the fact that they repeat all of the same tired apologist talking points, none of which prove the truth of Christianity or of God's existence
    1
  824.  @elliemccreesh6324  I don't believe we evolved from rocks. You seem to keep pushing positions or beliefs on me I have never asserted, and without asking what it is I do believe. Also the Bible has plenty of errors and contradictions.
    1
  825.  @elliemccreesh6324  I am not hell bent on proving you wrong. I am curious how anybody would seek to justify a claim/belief as grand as the one you have made, especially now you have implied you are not concerned with evidence. And yet again, you are attempting to imply I hold beliefs that I have neither asserted nor even hinted at. I do not claim we simply appeared from nowhere. You told me you have tried to be respectful towards me. I would appreciate it if you would so do by stopping making grand assumptions about me and attempting to dismiss my beliefs as ridiculous or illogical without even knowing what they are
    1
  826.  @elliemccreesh6324  So showing me further disrespect by ignoring what I said. How sad to see. I have made every attempt to understand what you said and believe I do. My not agreeing with it is not a sign of a lack of effort on my part. And it is precisely because I have put time into ensuring I understand the issues related to this matter that I have arrived at my current position. The fact that you maintain the bible is free of errors and contradictions says to me that it is perhaps you that requires further study
    1
  827.  @elliemccreesh6324  Well no. If I don't know and you don't know, then there is no reason to think a God even exists
    1
  828.  @elliemccreesh6324  What purpose does quoting Bible verses have?
    1
  829.  @elliemccreesh6324  You are the one continuing the conversation by posting random Bible verses. Hence my asking if there was a purpose behind them. Was there not?
    1
  830.  @elliemccreesh6324  No, but you asked a question of me and I thought it polite to respond as I am doing now. And of course you don'r have to justify your behavior to me. Just without justification it appears rather odd
    1
  831.  @christianjilwan8817  The argument from design is full of flaws and has been debunked countless times ever since its inception
    1
  832.  @christianjilwan8817  You are drawing a false equivalency. Two things both possessing the quality of seeming complex does not necessarily then mean that both require a creator simply because one of them does
    1
  833.  @christianjilwan8817  I did give an example, yours. Comparing a computer with the universe. You are essentially making the argument: 1.Both a computer and the universe appear complex 2. A computer has a creator 3. Therefore the universe has a creator It doesn't logically follow. Just because one characteristic is shared between the two it doesn't mean any more necessarily are. It's like me saying: 1.Both sparrows and butterflies have wings 2.A butterfly is an insect 3. Therefore a sparrow is an insect Doesn't work
    1
  834.  @christianjilwan8817  Well no, the burden here would fall to you to prove the first premise correct, not for me to prove that the inverse is true or exists
    1
  835.  @christianjilwan8817  "For all things that are complex and are DESIGNED to FUNCTION in a particular way" So you are already assuming that the universe is designed with intent?
    1
  836.  @christianjilwan8817  "The universe’s nature functions intricately for the purpose of maintaining life." Not at all. You are assigning intent for which there is no proof
    1
  837.  @christianjilwan8817  So are you suggesting that the universe was designed in order to maintain life?
    1
  838.  @christianjilwan8817  So how does that then lead you to the idea of a Universal Creator?
    1
  839.  @christianjilwan8817  But why do you think the universe has a function it is serving?
    1
  840.  @christianjilwan8817  That is not evidence enough. If you have further examples I will happily hear them but sounds like you are starting to stray into the argument from fine tuning
    1
  841.  @christianjilwan8817  Yes, I disagree with your assertion that the universe functions to maintain life. A human body functions to keep a human life, but to assert that the entire universe functions to maintain life is something you have simply not demonstrated. Could you expand on what you mean by the world "functioning to maintain its own ecosystem"?
    1
  842.  @christianjilwan8817  So you have just shifted from the argument from design to the argument to the argument from fine tuning. Are you aware of the puddle analogy and it's relation to the argument you are making?
    1
  843.  @christianjilwan8817  That is not the assumption of the puddle analogy at all. Whether the puddle could exist independently of the hole is irrelevant to the point being made, that being that the universe is not tailored for life but rather life has adapted to survive in the universe. An argument for which we have much more evidence. I didn't address the syllogism about the humans because your first premise still carries the problems addressed before
    1
  844.  @christianjilwan8817  I didn't say that life could adapt to any situation and that is not what the puddle analogy is stating either. It is simply suggesting that rather than the universe being perfectly designed for life, in this particular case life has rather formed in such a way as to utilize the conditions available. It is just as likely and no intent or designer is required. "is in itself a defiance of probability." Something being unlikely by its very definition does not mean its impossible. You have repeatedly stressed the unlikelihood of the universe being the way it, but that says nothing about the necessity of a creator. And I said exactly which premise I had a problem with in my previous comment....
    1
  845.  @christianjilwan8817  "In that case, there would be life on planets all around us, especially considering how many different types of conditions there are in the universe".Perhaps there is other life out there on another planet. Doesn't weaken the analogy. That is not the logical conclusion. The only thing one can draw from the improbable nature of the universe being here is that it was unlikely to have occurred. One thing being less likely does not automatically make another more likely, especially when there is nothing else supporting the existence of a creator. Again, you didn't need to assume, I literally said several comments ago "I didn't address the syllogism about the humans because your FIRST PREMISE still carries the problems addressed before". Saying there is no evidence to support a claim is most definitely a rebuttal. You haven't proven this premise in any way. A human does not clearly fit that premise, unless you are claiming there is one clear, objective purpose all humans are attempting to achieve?
    1
  846.  @christianjilwan8817  One should be able tto prove that a creator is even likely, or there is no reason to even consider it as a possible explanation for the origin of the universe. Otherwise we have the "Creatorless Universe" having a small chance of having happened and the "Universe from a creator" having zero. And that appears to be somewhat of a false dichotomy. How have you arrived at deciding those are the only two possible explanations? Right, and our bodies have evolved in a creator-less manner in which to operate and maintain a body
    1
  847. Why?
    1
  848. 그 남자 유튜브채널 있어요
    1
  849.  @nicholasgee9127  I thought you were not going to respond to me anymore because you found me to be disingenuous? I was waiting for examplea of such behavior
    1
  850.  @nicholasgee9127  Would still like an example of such disingenuous behavior so I can avoid coming across as such in future
    1
  851.  @adriana12995  How do you know those verses are meant to be taken literally?
    1
  852.  @adriana12995  Allegorical? An inclusion by man in order to ensure control of followers? There are numerous ways one could interpret every passage in the Bible and the book as a whole. Since the Bible has never been proven to be factually correct, it remains open for interpretation
    1
  853.  @adriana12995  You could still claim to be a Christian in so far as you see the figure of Christ as an inspirational one, and recognize that there are Biblical lessons you would like to apply to modern life. Not believing the Bible is the literal unchanging word of God also doesn't mean you don't believe that there is a God.
    1
  854.  @adriana12995  That is your take on Christianity, others have theirs. All equally valid, all equally un-proven
    1
  855.  @adriana12995  Morality is completely relative. It's why the Bible and those alive at the time considered slavery perfectly acceptable and moral, yet we can now look back and condemn. Well I can, you seem unable to...
    1
  856.  @adriana12995  And then permitted his people to go on and own their own slaves. Which I have already pointed out to you. Where is the verse of God saying slavery is wrong and should not be carried out. You know, as he does with murder, with theft, with adultery etc. Where is a single verse of God directly saying slavery is wrong and immoral?
    1
  857. Really? I would be curious to see that. Care to destroy some arguments for me?
    1
  858. Yes they can. Bible's pretty easy to pick apart, even by a layperson. Mostly because anybody wanting to claim it is true has the burden of proof fall upon them, and good luck proving that
    1
  859. How is being progressive putting your own desires above God?
    1
  860.  @nicholasgee9127  And how do you know what is the intended message of the scripture?
    1
  861. Well I don't think there are any Democrats who are actively anti 2nd amendment, are there?
    1
  862. Is that the Canadian street preacher guy?
    1
  863.  @that1ne_guy  Why would you want him here? Isn't he the guy who never has a civil conversation and just shouts at people? Who got arrested for something recently?
    1
  864.  @that1ne_guy  Yeah, because Tanner is a very abrasive person who makes up for weakness in debate by arguing aggresively
    1
  865.  @that1ne_guy  Sorry, clearly I meant Lynn I am afraid I have seen enough to know I find him highly off putting
    1
  866. Dude, youtube's not the place for proselytizing
    1
  867. Check vid description
    1
  868. Every Christian makes their own version of Jesus. Progressive Christians are just wise enough to have theirs reflect the values of modern society and to reject and cast off some of the horrors in the Bible
    1
  869.  @danielcifuentes2603  No everybody does. Until the Bible is proven to be absolute fact and it is completely understood with no room for doubt, then everybody is simply following their own interpretation and placing their own importance on different parts of it. Even those who believe it is supposed to be taken 100% literally.
    1
  870.  @danielcifuentes2603  And how does any Christian know for sure that their interpretation or understanding of a verse is indeed correct?
    1
  871.  @oliviaokpara8877  They promoted the owning of people as property and beating them as you like. Where is the verse outright forbidden slavery for the evil it is?
    1
  872.  @lordofyouhaha  That is essentially an argument along the lines of something called Pascal's Wager. It has been show to be full of flaws in reasoning multiple times
    1
  873. So you think homosexuality is a sin?
    1
  874.  @rajatsoni3763  What do you mean?
    1
  875. How are they mocking?
    1
  876.  @classique_  So what part of that is mockery?
    1
  877. Ezekiel 23:20
    1
  878. What truth is that?
    1
  879.  @kiavaxxaskew  Why?
    1
  880.  @michellemichaud4916  So you truly believe every word of the Bible is true?
    1
  881.  @michellemichaud4916  Well no, if you believe in an omniscient, infallible God you can;t also believe in free will, the two are incompatible
    1
  882.  @sunkyokim6052  Who are you to make that claim?
    1
  883.  @sunkyokim6052  I don't know where you are getting that from. If I remember properly 선교씨, I had to teach you that that the Gospels were not actually written by the Apostles themselves
    1
  884.  @roneldell5137  I would ask anybody making grand claims to back up said claims. And I don't believe I have called anybody names.
    1
  885.  @roneldell5137  Then please don't speak about atheists in sweeping negative generalities if it doesn't even apply to all those present in this comment section
    1
  886.  @sunkyokim6052  And I pointed out to you that that is a meaningless difference as you would have no proof that the original source was genuinely from the Apostles. Unless you have proof of that?
    1
  887.  @sunkyokim6052  No, I was busy. I did not use google translate. If I was going to translate I would use Papago. I live in Korea, married to a Korean. I am not fluent but I do speak a bit. I don't believe I have mocked you at any point. Nor do I feel you have actually brought me any evidence in our limited interactions. If you do have evidence that Christianity is true I would love to hear it. If I have rejected evidence you provided previously I am sure it is for good reason. And I am commenting on this video because it is an area that interests me, and I am curios as to how it is any Christian, whether they be progressive or conservative, came to arrive at the position they hold. Claiming a God exists is not merely some tiny difference in opinion. It is stating something that would change our understanding of absolutely everything
    1
  888.  @sunkyokim6052  But I haven't even asked you to debate the existence of God. I and somebody else on this video simply asked you who you were to judge who and who is not Christian. That is incredibly relevant to this video and a direct response to a comment YOU chose to make
    1
  889.  @sunkyokim6052  I did read your comment. You stated your claim was based on scripture and then lead us off on a tangent talking about past discussions, failing to expand on the original answer. If you feel scripture gives you the basis to determine who and who is not a Christian I would be happy to hear it
    1
  890.  @sunkyokim6052  That is only the case if the Bible is both intended to be taken 100% literally with no interpretation and is in fact true. And until that is proved, the correct way to be a Christian is open for interpretation and debate with no one group able to say they are more "correct" in their Christianity than another.
    1
  891.  @sunkyokim6052  I am not telling you how Christians should behave. It's quite the opposite. I am saying that since nobody can prove definitively that their understanding of the Bible is the correct one, then nobody is in a position to tell somebody else that they are not a Christian or that their take on Christianity is incorrect.
    1
  892.  @sunkyokim6052  That is one way you could apply my thinking, yes. The other way is with the point in hand, that you are not able to tell anybody else they are not Christian
    1
  893. How so?
    1
  894. People are forced to make the Bible adapt to modern society. It is a book from around 2000 years ago. There is a bunch of stuff that is no longer relevant and stuff that is quite frankly horrific
    1
  895. @Çaesar Caesar, how curious to see you here. I am still waiting for a response to you on a previous thread where you promised "I will respond to your post with the proper context of the Bible". It hasn't come around. This seems to be a recurring thing for you, starting discussions which you never finish
    1
  896.  Joe  Ah really? If he is a troll he is a pretty terrible one. Dude has ended conversations with me several times now after the most basic of questioning
    1
  897. @Çaesar You didn't go into any depth at all. You said you would provide explanation and then gave no further comments. i wouldn't have raised it, except your response to me on this thread would lead me to raise the same issues as our previous conversation, and I saw no point in doing so when you had seemingly abandoned said conversation.
    1
  898.  @Twisterbeast  I am not picking any fight. I simply pointed out to them that they told to wait for a further comment from them on a different topic, yet they are starting a new conversation with me. I simply wanted to check if this meant I should consider the previous conversation over. Is that not a reasonable thing to ask? " Only God can make the blind see, nothing that we argue will change each other's view". I am perfectly open to having my views changed on nay number of topics. If you are saying you are not, it would seem like you are suffering from blind faith
    1
  899. Says who?
    1
  900. And who determines who is following the correct word exactly? And who it is that has the correct word?
    1
  901. Ok...
    1
  902. What about cases of rape?
    1
  903.  @natalie-qi5ft  I am aware. I was attemtping to point out to the original commenter however that they simply cannot paint everybody with the same brush
    1
  904. And you do?
    1
  905. Who is attacking him? All the comments I have seen have been expressing concern for his well-being and sadness at the situation he has found himself in
    1
  906.  @brooklynmecham3017  How were they attacking him? They seemed perfectly polite and empathetic to me
    1
  907.  @brooklynmecham3017  They weren't trying to change his mind, but to gain greater understanding. Asking somebody if they are unhappy with that situation is perfectly reasonable. Anybody who strongly desires something reasonable that others have, but is denied it must be struggling with it. I and many others in this comment section feel sad that Angel feels forced to deny who he is
    1
  908.  @sunkyokim6052  And what if you are wrong and it is actually the Hindu Gods who are real? Or the Buddhist cycle of death hand rebirth? And I am sorry but there simply is not. And I hope you don't take this too harshly but you will forgive me for being extra skeptical of you when you say this as I had to inform you that the Gospels were not written by the Apostles themselves.
    1
  909.  @sunkyokim6052  I should bring evidence that there is no evidencd of an afterlife....? It is almost impossible to prove something doesn't exist. If you want to claim an afterlife DOES exist you would need to prove it
    1
  910.  @sunkyokim6052  Do you actually want me to find a link for you?
    1
  911.  @sunkyokim6052  Ok, I will post a link below now in a separate comment. Youtube has a tendency to hide such comments fearing they are spam so please let me know if you can see it
    1
  912.  @sunkyokim6052  Ok, so I already can not see the link I posted. Can you?
    1
  913. ​ @sunkyokim6052  Ok, well if you google history dot com and "who wrote the bible" you can see a pretty concise summary. In case you can't find it, here's the relevant quote "Beginning around 70 A.D., about four decades after Jesus’s crucifixion (according to the Bible), four anonymously written chronicles of his life emerged that would become central documents in the Christian faith. Named for Jesus’s most devoted earthly disciples, or apostles—Matthew, Mark, Luke and John—the four canonical Gospels were traditionally thought to be eyewitness accounts of Jesus’s life, death and resurrection. But for more than a century, scholars have generally agreed that the Gospels, like many of the books of the New Testament, were not actually written by the people to whom they are attributed. In fact, it seems clear that the stories that form the basis of Christianity were first communicated orally, and passed down from generation to generation, before they were collected and written down."
    1
  914.  @sunkyokim6052  So the gospels are a collection of stories heard by the authors, from a number of different sources, none of whom were actually there, and yet are still 100% correct?
    1
  915. Why not?
    1
  916. How so?
    1
  917. Well to be fair, there has never been proven to be anybody who actually possesses psychic powers at all
    1
  918. That's what every Christian does....
    1
  919.  @f.baekha  So you are saying you would follow the teachings of the Bible exactly, and believe every word to be true?
    1
  920.  @f.baekha  Right. So Progressives just interpret the bible in a different way. They are still Christians
    1
  921.  @f.baekha  Huh? What do you mean?
    1
  922.  @f.baekha  How do you know a modern interpretation is less correct than any other?
    1
  923. What would be any different with "educated astrologers"?
    1
  924.  @motivatedmind8166  How so? They would present compelling evidence?
    1
  925.  @theoutlandishblueprint2419  It doesn't matter if something is systematically organized. A well organized collection of baseless claims is still just a collection of baseless claims
    1
  926. He didn't say he was asexual did he? He acknowledged having sexual attraction but is forcing himself to not act upon them due to what he believes the scriptures say about the nature of that attraction
    1
  927. Ignorant of what?
    1
  928. The Satanic Temple has a bunch of precepts that members try to live by which seem way more palatable than the majority of major world religions
    1
  929. And astrology has become irrelevant in the face of astronomy
    1
  930.  @myathemango2936  Yes. Clearly
    1
  931. What do you mean?
    1
  932.  @shongololo3628  Well that's a very broad statement. Surely that's highly contextual and there are many situations where its clear no blame should be ascribed and plenty where it clearly should?
    1
  933.  @giannazeringue6837  If God hates nobody, then how do you explain his vindictive nature and unnecessary cruelty towards people in the Bible?
    1
  934. You don't seem to know what it is modern Satanists believe
    1
  935. Why would you do that?
    1
  936.  Parth Asha  Wasn't talking to you
    1
  937.  @abc-df3xq  If me going to heaven is completely my decision and based on my actions, then what is you praying about it going to achieve?
    1
  938. You agree with all that the Bible say? You think the message is straightforward?
    1
  939.  @zita1213  So creation story is true? biblical morals still apply to the world today?
    1
  940.  @mahlatsimoroka1500  Science and the Bible go hand in hand? Science and the creation story would seem to contradict each other And in terms of morals, you agree that slavery is acceptable then?
    1
  941.  @mahlatsimoroka1500  Right, except the bible says the earth was literally created by God... The Bible has plenty of rules concerning the correct way to own other people as property, including the correct way to beat them. Never once says slavery is wrong
    1
  942.  @extereali7301  Yes
    1
  943. Yeah, unlike all of those well read, free thinking Trump supporters, who never just blindly accept what he says without question....
    1
  944. And achieved what? If the seasoned veterans had better clear answers and evidence, the truth of astrology wouldn't even be up for debate
    1
  945. Before you stand by this claim, you might want to go over to the "6 Democrats vs 1 Secret Republican" video and see the comment section full of republicans bashing democrats
    1
  946. Yeah, it's pseudo-science
    1
  947. Let's be clear though, I don't think anybody is "pro abortion", they are "pro choice"
    1
  948. No, the two are nowhere near being comparable.
    1
  949.  @harbour08  It doesn't hold up. Label them what you will, murder causes demonstrable harm. What harm is caused by two consenting adults of the same gender entering in to a relationship?
    1
  950. Why not?
    1
  951.  @albertapodaca  "There is only one true and living God his ways never change and his word is true" So Christians should still be ok with slavery then?
    1
  952.  @albertapodaca  The Bible condones and never condemns slavery. So in the eyes of the Christian who believes the teachings of the Bible are never changing, slavery should still be morally acceptable. Do you think it is?
    1
  953.  @albertapodaca  There are literally verses talking about taking prisoners of war as slaves, when it is acceptable to beat your slave, when it is a slave should be released. Slavery is most definitely condoned
    1
  954.  @albertapodaca  The Bible was also used as justification by early colonialists for Slavery.... And that's all irrelevant. You said God's ways never change. The Bible condones slavery and never condemns it. So all those Christian abolitionists were going against the word of God, right?
    1
  955.  @albertapodaca  Nobody is talking about a metaphor of the world being a slave system. I am talking about biblical slavery. Owning another person as property and viewing them as such, beating them as you like. Of course I am stuck on this one issue, it's horrific. How could anybody trust God as amoral authority when he permits slavery. Unless you think owning another person is perfectly ok?
    1
  956.  @albertapodaca  Old and new covenant is also irrelevant. The fact remains that at one time, God thought it perfectly moral and correct to allow his people to own slaves and beat them as they liked. Slavery has never been acceptable And the fact that you just asked me if owning another person as property is evil is incredibly worrying
    1
  957.  @albertapodaca  Nope
    1
  958.  @albertapodaca  Of course I can use the term evil. I am designating it evil based upon my own moral code. I consider slavery evil and those who would support it or excuse it to be abhorrent. The concept no, the practice, often times yes. Completely different from slavery wherein the concept is evil
    1
  959.  @albertapodaca   @albert apodaca  A greater objective good and evil do not exist to me, but good an evil most certainly, based on my own moral code, as I have already said. I am really not sure how as somebody who has now said they have no problem with slavery, you can seek to lecture me about morals...
    1
  960.  @albertapodaca  So in your eyes, slavery has always been objectively wrong and immoral?
    1
  961.  @albertapodaca  That was an awful lot of words dedicated solely to completely misrepresenting my world view and making excuses for slavery
    1
  962. No, they are Satanists. You perhaps have an incorrect idea of what a modern Satanist believes
    1
  963. What sin does Curt love more than God? And I don;t see why you are singling out Brenda. Every Christian cherry picks
    1
  964. "believing in politics"? Care to elaborate?
    1
  965. You don't trust science because it might sometimes be later proven wrong as our knowledge increases?
    1
  966. Why?
    1
  967. How so?
    1
  968. Who is seeking to remove the right to gun ownership completely? I have only heard calls for tougher regulations. Which if we are comparing to borders is no different from wanting certain border controls in place. Are you against common sense gun control legislation?
    1
  969.  @michaelcollins8328  You think there should be zero laws relating to gun ownership....?
    1
  970.  @michaelcollins8328  Oh wow. People like you actually exist
    1
  971.  @michaelcollins8328  Oh I'm sorry, was that last comment of yours supposed to lead to actual serious discussion of some kind?
    1
  972. Me: So Christ’s body is the bread? Priest: yes Me: and he rose from the grave Priest: yes... Me: because of the yeast? Priest: no Me: okay, none of this makes sense
    1
  973. No, because most modern satanists don't believe in a literal Satan or hell....
    1
  974. Why do you think that?
    1
  975. Huh? What do you mean?
    1
  976.  @christina6799  These others?
    1
  977. What's a "libtard"?
    1
  978. You don't think that the world is more generally aware of the Christian position on matters than they are the Satanist, and therefore the Satanists need to ensure their position is understood?
    1
  979. The world didn't do anything to the word Christian, the faith did. The world marches on and progresses forward, if Christianity is unwilling to do the same it will fade further into irrelevance
    1
  980. Because there seems to be no compelling reason to believe the claims of astrology
    1
  981.  @kikamond936  Well everybody has a take on Christianity. It's completely open for interpretation
    1
  982.  @kikamond936  Right, and how do you know those verses are meant to be taken literally?
    1
  983.  @kikamond936  No, I meant why should they be taken as literally true and to be followed?
    1
  984. "Come to your sense"? I don't understand. What do you mean?
    1
  985. How so?
    1
  986. @Çaesar You're still here Caesar? What happened to our previous discussion? The post seems to have been deleted
    1
  987. @Çaesar Well the post has gone, presumably deleted by the original poster. But based on the preview in the notification I got you were actually attempting to justify slave owners beating their slaves as somehow moral and just
    1
  988. Equally? Hard to see that taking place
    1
  989. You are a conduit for Jesus?
    1
  990. Ah yes, the argument from fine tuning. Debunked countless times and yet still trotted out
    1
  991. How so?
    1
  992.  @yiyithewuster  How so?
    1
  993.  @tiny-grimes  Well said
    1
  994.  @truthliberty5695  You need to look again at the Biblical stance on slavery. It's messed up
    1
  995.  @truthliberty5695  I don't know dude. I think a supposedly perfect, moral God condoning the owning of people as property is messed up
    1
  996.  @truthliberty5695  It is condoned in the Bible. There are rules on the treatment of slaves, where to purchased them, the fact that they can be passed down to your children. Slavery is condoned and never condemned. It's atrocious.
    1
  997.  The Real Jordan  It's amazing how much Truth and Liberty likes the sound of their own voice, huh?
    1
  998.  @truthliberty5695  I haven't lost anything. You haven't directly replied to my last comment pointing out you were wrong. I assume because you were too busy ranting at The Real Jordan.
    1
  999.  @truthliberty5695  No direct response to this comment "It is condoned in the Bible. There are rules on the treatment of slaves, where to purchase them, the fact that they can be passed down to your children. Slavery is condoned and never condemned. It's atrocious."
    1
  1000.  @truthliberty5695  Wow, never thought I would put so much effort into defending slavery. "God isn't going to impose a standard on the entire world something the world didn't agree to." Yes he is, he demands standards of behavior throughout the Bible "Sure, it was a more rough time overall, but even a slave had some protection in Israel-- just another example of setting a better standard." Nope. The only laws relating to the treatment of a slave in the Bible applied to Hebrew men only. If you were bought from another tribe or were a prisoner of war, no protections.
    1
  1001.  @truthliberty5695  So you admit God gave his people permission to own others as property. It's abhorrent, right?
    1
  1002. Every Christian is picking and choosing which parts they believe and how much importance to give to each one. That's why there is no united Christian church
    1
  1003. Not really. People here are required to be able to hold a civil discussion
    1
  1004.  @josiahball2678  So it's just a numbers game all about saving life? So you must want to make sure everybody has access to free healthcare whenever they need it, right?
    1
  1005. How are the two situations at all comparable?
    1
  1006.  @JP-dp3kt  Why would we disregard historical texts and writings that are confirmed through a variety of sources and evidence. There is no evidence for the divine claims of the Bible
    1
  1007.  @JP-dp3kt  No, I would expect that if somebody were genuinely walking around and performing miracles, it would be found to have been written about in multiple sources, not just one book. I am familiar with Josephus and how often he is trotted out as somehow being proof. The writings of Josephus prove nothing of the Bible's validity. The titanic seems like such an odd example to choose, especially as we literally still have the sunken boat present as evidence. We didn't witness it floating, but only a generation ago there were still people alive who did. We have photos, we have countless records relating to its construction and launch. We have nothing even close to that in way of evidence that a divine Jesus existed. And the wager you are engaging in is called Pascal's Wager and has been shown to have a multitude of logical flaws ever since it was first conceived. Also, why are you calling me brother?
    1
  1008.  @JP-dp3kt  And what would those texts be? i would like to look into them, though I hope they are not in a similar vein to Josephus. Never said that. I don't believe in a divine Christ because there is no good reason for me to do so
    1
  1009.  @JP-dp3kt  Those are 3 examples , not nine. But if you would like I can explain to you how those do not stand up as evidence of the divine Christ? "all that the writers in the Bible had first hand accounts". You are not suggesting that the four Gospels for example, are actually first hand accounts, written by witnesses of Jesus are you?
    1
  1010.  @JP-dp3kt  So am I to take your ignoring my offer to explain how Tacitus, Suetonius etc are not valid proof, as you no longer seeking to present them as such. The accepted time of writing of the Gospel is anywhere between 60-150 or so years after the death of Jesus. Even if they are based on what was once original eyewitness accounts they are bound to have lost something between the time of events and their eventual writing. It's not about having sufficient evidence to discount the Resurrection. That suggests you are working from the understanding that the Resurrection was obviously a true event and requires evidence to be proven false. It is the opposite. Any truth claim that is going to be made needs evidence to back it up.There is insufficient evidence for the Resurrection for any reasonable person to accept it as true historical fact. There are plenty of people who die for what they believe is true. Doesn't mean it was. In that case you must accept that any religion that has somebody die in its name must be true
    1
  1011.  @JP-dp3kt  Ok, let's look at them one by one then Tacitus - States that Nero persecuted a sect called the Christians whose leader was put to death by Pontious Pilate. Never mind the fact that it says nothing about the divine nature of Jesus, accepting as a valid source at all is highly questionable. Prior to the writing of this two fires had destroyed much in the way of official documents that Tactius had to work with, so given limited concrete records available it would suggest Tacitus was repeating an urban myth whose source was likely the Christians themselves, especially since Tacitus was writing at a time when at least the three synoptic gospels are thought to already have been in circulation. There is no other historical confirmation that Nero persecuted Christians for the burning of Rome. Josephus and Pliny the Elder - who were both in Rome in 64 CE - didn't mention Christians at all, which seems unlikely if Nero had been blaming them for the fire. Seneca the Younger's lost On Superstition also didn't mention Christianity, according to Augustine in the 4th century. Furthermore, Neither Origen nor Tertullian use this passage despite referring to or citing Tacitus elsewhere.
    1
  1012.  @JP-dp3kt  Suetonius, has a couple of quotes commonly used as apparent evidence for Christ. The first mentions that Claudius “banished the Jews from Rome, since they had made a commotion because of Chrestus.” "Chrestus," a common name meaning “good,” was used by both slaves and free people and occurs more than 80 times in Latin inscriptions.[3] There is nothing other than similarity in spelling to suggest that there is any relationship between Chrestus and Christ and it is unlikely that Christianity had spread as far as Rome during the reign of Claudius, or that it was large enough to have caused a revolt. The second simply states "Punishment was inflicted on the Christians, a class of men given to a new and mischievous superstition". Though there is some historical doubt about Chrisitians even being present in Rome at this point, even if there were all this passage would confirm is that Christians existed, it says nothing about the existence of a divine Christ
    1
  1013.  @JP-dp3kt  And Pliny is much the same. Even if anybody is to take what he wrote about Christians as true, all it would do is confirm the presence of Christians and offers nothing even close to evidence for the a divine Christ. I don't see how you can possibly argue there is anything resembling evidence sufficient enough to believe in the existence of a divine Christ.
    1
  1014.  @JP-dp3kt  That still doesn't mean they hold up though. I stated I had no reason to believe in a divine Christ and you offered those writing s as evidence.Even if you misunderstood me and were seeking to provide evidence of a historical Christ instead, those still do not stand up as strong evidence. I believe there was likely a figure of figures that inspired the cult of Christianity to begin, yes
    1
  1015.  @JP-dp3kt  You mean based on the texts you provided alone or based on all historical evidence?
    1
  1016.  @JP-dp3kt  At the time, in the region, it was considered a cult. Besides, what's the old saying? "Religion = Cult + Time" Then it is not a yes or no question. I cannot 100% confirm that the figure of Jesus of Nazareth did not exist. We also do not have enough evidence to conclusively say that he did. That is why, based on what we do have, I think all we can say it is likely a figure or figures, existed that inspired what we know today as Christianity.
    1
  1017.  @JP-dp3kt  I spelled it that way when quoting Suetonius. Nice paraphrasing of wikipedia in your second paragraph there. I said it was likely that a figure who inspired Christianity existed, yes. That doesn't mean in any way shape or form that said individual matches the description of Jesus of Nazareth as in the Bible. Do you think it does?
    1
  1018.  @JP-dp3kt  I believe they would both be referring to the same individual, but that doesn't mean that the Bible's description of said individual is therefore accurate. Are you suggesting it is?
    1
  1019.  @JP-dp3kt  You may think this a childish example but please bear with me here. Imagine you find an old newspaper clipping referring to a man who saved a woman from being mugged. No other details, they just recognize that on the date mentioned a woman claims she was rescued from a mugging by a man. You then also find a book that refers to the mugging, stating that the protagonist of this book is the one who intervened, and is in fact the superhero the world has been waiting for, blessed with super strength, super speed, flight etc and he is destined to protect us from a future alien invasion. Would you therefore believe that this superhero exists and alien invasion is imminent?
    1
  1020.  @JP-dp3kt  I called it a cult because as I said, at the time, to the Romans writing all of the documents you were presenting, it would appear as a cult. I have not called it as such since as you asked me not to. I have not been a "jerk" at all Why do you keep misrepresenting my position? Whether the historical figure of "Jesus" ever existed was never what i was asking you to prove, it was the divine Jesus. I have told you multiple times that I acknowledge the historical figure who inspired Christianity, known as Jesus likely existed. All I have asked you to do is explain to me how you get from that, to accepting everything that the Bible says to you is true? If you are unable to do that, then yes, I encourage you wholeheartedly to do more reading and analyze why it is you currently believe what you do, as you seem unable to put it into words right now. Also, why "sir"? Are you under the impression I'm a man?
    1
  1021. Atheism is certainly growing, but don't think it's close to being the majority yet
    1
  1022. So neither one is better than the other?
    1
  1023.  @Rachel_au  To be fair, there is no proof that anything Christian's claim is God-breathed scripture is in fact so
    1
  1024. Why not?
    1
  1025.  @tayrey9434  So a true Christian is one who just does as the Bible says?
    1
  1026. What would that be?
    1
  1027.  @dannamejia6676  What lifestyle are they leading that's counter to the Bible?
    1
  1028. Progressive Christian = A person who acknowledges that an ancient book still has some good lessons to follow in our modern world, but isn't foolish enough to attempt to live by every rule dictated to a society 2000 years ago
    1
  1029. "Satanists come across as arrogant as Christians only more desperate to avoid responsibility" Could you elaborate? I don't understand
    1
  1030. Yes, you could. And you are free to do that just as people are free to invalidate these people as psychics. Once an actually genuine psychic is found and they are proven to be more than just fraudsters, we can talk about changing attitudes
    1
  1031. Well if you don't believe the story behind the religion is actually true, I guess you would wonder why it is that people believe what they do, and that religion provides and emotional comfort is certainly one potential explanation
    1
  1032. Adoption is not right?
    1
  1033. Why would you feel sorry for an atheist?
    1
  1034. Turning to the Holy spirit is not a means for discerning truth. It is exactly the same as your own individual feeling on things
    1
  1035. Right, except God is responsible for sin....
    1
  1036. And are you equally upset about anybody who breaks any of the other sins listed in Leviticus?
    1
  1037. @Pastafarian Who are you to determine that?
    1
  1038. @Pastafarian So you believe that you have the correct understanding of the Bible in its entirety? Fascinating. If that is the case, why are you not using said knowledge to unite Christianity's many denominations and factions?
    1
  1039. Also signed the civil rights act. Try using a more recent example dear...
    1
  1040. And who determines who is a false teacher?
    1
  1041.  @kikamond936  And how do you know progressive Christians are going against the intended message of the Bible?
    1
  1042. ​ @kikamond936  Because you hear them speak you know they are going against the intended message of the Bible? So you believe you know the correct interpretation and message of the Bible? That's amazing. It would solve a lot of conflict and remove a lot of denominations if you could share that with the world
    1
  1043.  @kikamond936  So you don't claim to know the truth but say people can find the truth. So how do you know progressive Christians haven't already found the truth?
    1
  1044.  @kikamond936  I am not talking in circles., I am exposing the flaws in your reasoning. The fact that you think it sounds like talking in circles only further highlights said flaws.
    1
  1045.  @TimfromGB  "Least racist country in the world"? Haha good one
    1
  1046.  @sunkyokim6052  Ah you're still around. Did you happen to look into the authorship of the Bible as I recommended?
    1
  1047.  @sunkyokim6052  I have read the Bible, yes. And it is not just my claim or suspicion. All Biblical scholars acknowledge that we have no idea who wrote the Gospels and have no reason to believe they were written by the apostles themselves. If you had followed up on what I said you would have found this
    1
  1048. Why are you typing G-d and L-rd?
    1
  1049. And how do you know how psychics abilities work?
    1
  1050. Ok....and the point you were hoping to make with that statement was what?
    1
  1051.  @victorflores7973  People are not magnets....
    1
  1052.  @victorflores7973  I am not. The comparison was ridiculous.
    1
  1053.  @victorflores7973  It doesn't work as a metaphor either. It shows a complete ignorance of the nature of human sexuality. And I am good, thanks. Though why are you calling me "brother"?
    1
  1054.  @victorflores7973  Ok. So?
    1
  1055.  @victorflores7973  I'm very confused
    1
  1056. What do you mean?
    1
  1057. Plenty of contradictions in the Bible
    1
  1058.  @dallasbrat81  Again? Have we met before? And I am happy to provide contradictions if you would like me to. Just let me know
    1
  1059.  @dallasbrat81  So you don't want to hear about the contradictions in the Bible?
    1
  1060.  @lianobodynobodynobody5083  What context is there that forgives what I just said? If you think you can somehow provide some, you can start with Exodus 21:20-21
    1
  1061.  @lianobodynobodynobody5083  But the verse says you can beat your slaves. You can beat them to within an inch of their life, but as long as they don't actually die, it's ok. It's horrific
    1
  1062.  @lianobodynobodynobody5083  It says if you beat your slaves and they don't die, you won't be punished. That is condoning the beating of slaves. And why does it matter if it's Old Testament?
    1
  1063.  @ferusskywalker9167  Why does it matter if they are from the OT?
    1
  1064.  @lianobodynobodynobody5083  Kimg James Version 20 And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall be surely punished. 21 Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he is his money. New International version 20 “Anyone who beats their male or female slave with a rod must be punished if the slave dies as a direct result, 21 but they are not to be punished if the slave recovers after a day or two, since the slave is their property. It is not personal injury. It specifically mentions a master beating their slave with a rod. To try and pretend otherwise is just dishonest. And it doesn't matter if it's in the OT. Do you think it is or has ever been morally ok to own slaves and beat them?
    1
  1065.  @lianobodynobodynobody5083  "first of all I’m not ignoring anything " I mean, you replied to a comment that came after mine directly addressing you....
    1
  1066.  @lianobodynobodynobody5083  I see no comment from you after mine
    1
  1067.  @lianobodynobodynobody5083  Huh? I responded to that one. You responded to my reply. I am talking about my most recent comment, quoting Exodus from two versions of the Bible. You have not addressed it
    1
  1068.  @SRHisntSilent  How does anybody know what God says?
    1
  1069.  @lianobodynobodynobody5083  I am ignoring that aspect because it is not written anywhere in the verse. Please quote me the actual passage from within the Bible that states a slave is to be released after they have been beaten. It doesn't say anything about them being able to leave after being beaten
    1
  1070.  @lianobodynobodynobody5083  Please quote the exact words within the Biblical texts that say a slave is to be released after having been beaten
    1
  1071.  @lianobodynobodynobody5083  Where does it say to release them? It says if the slave has recovered after a few days, then the owner is fine, and the lost work time is punishment. So an owner can beat a slave into a coma, but if they are awake and shakily back on their feet, it's ok. It's horrific. And that is what you are trying to defend
    1
  1072.  @lianobodynobodynobody5083  I know. That's what I said.
    1
  1073.  @lianobodynobodynobody5083  So we are on the same page. We both recognize that the Bible says that master can beat his slave as much as he likes, with the only limitations be that the slave can't have died after a couple of days, and that the master must recognize he will be down on slave in his workforce whilst they recover. You find this a good, moral, acceptable thing?
    1
  1074.  @lianobodynobodynobody5083  I am not claiming you find it a good moral thing, I am asking if you do?
    1
  1075.  @lianobodynobodynobody5083  What things...?
    1
  1076.  @lianobodynobodynobody5083  You literally said two hours ago: "However, if the slave lives a few days after the beating, you are not to be punished. After all, you have already lost the services of that slave who was your property." There you have it. Death is the only restriction. Otherwise the Bible condones beating your slaves as you like
    1
  1077.  @lianobodynobodynobody5083  I am not ignoring what you type. I had thought you were finally seeing the verse for what it said and not trying to paint it in a positive light. Guess I was wrong. Is it not hard putting all this energy into defending the biblical right to beat your slaves?
    1
  1078.  @lianobodynobodynobody5083  Let me try boil this down to its most simplest form. Do you acknowledge, that the verses in Exodus allow a master to beat his slaves?
    1
  1079.  @lianobodynobodynobody5083  Please answer my question. Do you acknowledge that the verses in Exodus allow a master to beat his slaves?
    1
  1080.  @lianobodynobodynobody5083  So you do acknowledge it was permissible. Do you think owning and beating a slave has ever been morally ok?
    1
  1081. ​ @lianobodynobodynobody5083  You can try to make it sound nicer by calling it a personal injury, but why not just be open about what it was. Biblically sanctioned beating of another human because they were considered nothing more than property. I suspect the reason that you are having a hard time directly saying whether you consider it morally ok, is because you a good person who recognizes that owning and beating slaves is not acceptable. The problem is you have always been taught or held the belief that the Bible is a good book, with no errors. So you are forced to try and find any excuse possible to defend a position you find appalling. But why Lia? You need to ask yourself this. Why would a good, moral God allow slavery and permit the slave masters to beat their slaves?
    1
  1082.  @lianobodynobodynobody5083  And ignoring everything I said. What a telling sign. Or is it simply that you think slavery is moral?
    1
  1083.  @lianobodynobodynobody5083  Seriously? What question of yours am I supposed to have ignored that is more important than you confirming that you don't support slavery....?
    1
  1084.  @lianobodynobodynobody5083  Seriously? That is more important to you than defending yourself against the accusation of supporting slavery? That's just sad Lia... 1. You started to seem to finally be on the same page when you said: "losing the work time was not a punishment for the slave. The slave would have to recover (away) and in order for that to happen they wouldn’t be able to serve their owner so service was lost for the owner indicating that if you want your services to do their services then don’t beat your slave." As I pointed out to you at the time very clearly, it meant that we both recognized the Bible allowed the beating of slaves, with punishment only coming in if the slave died. 2. You have stated several times, incorrectly, that after beating a slave they are free to leave their master's service: "what I said was that when they heal after a few days they are free to go because of the slave owners misconduct" That is simply not the case and is indicated nowhere in the verses
    1
  1085.  @lianobodynobodynobody5083  Now please answer my question that you have repeatedly ignored. Do you think owning and beating slaves is good and moral?
    1
  1086.  @lianobodynobodynobody5083  Please now answer my question. Do you think owning and beating slaves has ever been morally ok?
    1
  1087.  @lianobodynobodynobody5083  Does God directly say beating your slave is forbidden? No. Does he give guidelines under which one can beat their slave and suffer no direct punishment? Yes. The bible condones beating your slaves. At this point I have said this so many times I made it so clear that you must be lying to yourself about what it is the bible says. Don't want to admit it's horrible stance on slavery perhaps
    1
  1088.  @lianobodynobodynobody5083  Of course not! Owning people as property and beating them as you please is horrific. And declaring it as such should be the easiest thing in the world. The fact that you can't is highly worrying
    1
  1089.  @lianobodynobodynobody5083  Do you perhaps not understand what condoning means? I have never said that the Bible actively encourages people to beat their slaves, or declares it to be a pure and Godly thing. But the fact remains that there are instructions on how to correctly beat your slave, when too much of a beating has occured. That means it is biblically permissible, God was ok with it.
    1
  1090.  @lianobodynobodynobody5083  The verse we have been discussing this entire time. You can beat slaves as long as they don't die
    1
  1091. It does indeed
    1
  1092.  @wakandaforeva6316  The chart doesn't determine your personality? So what is astrology stating?
    1
  1093.  @wakandaforeva6316  So it's a map about your life , which determines absolutely nothing about your life and could end up being completely wrong....?
    1
  1094.  @wakandaforeva6316  So I fail to see how it of any use, could be considered trustworthy or claimed to be true
    1
  1095.  @wakandaforeva6316  And how do we verify that information does indeed accurately match those individuals? How do we use these personal claims of accuracy to verify the truth of astrology?
    1
  1096.  @wakandaforeva6316  Why? Would seem that if it is an ancient practice they and the followers of astrology have had plenty of time to prove its truth to the world and haven't succeeded in all that time
    1
  1097.  @wakandaforeva6316  Well, no. Something has been proven or it hasn't. It's not about perspective, it's about objective fact. Astrology has never been shown to be factually true, despite being around for so long
    1
  1098.  @wakandaforeva6316  I am not attempting to push anybody down. But should somebody be claiming astrology is true, it is perfectly reasonable of me to ask them to prove that, no?
    1
  1099. How does anybody know what it is God has supposedly said?
    1
  1100. "Why can’t the scientific laws and explanations for how the world works coexist with the explanations for things that science just can’t explain." Because the scientific laws have evidence and proof behind them. Things like astrology do not and should not be treated as equally true or valid
    1
  1101. Says who?
    1
  1102.  @kiavaxxaskew  Leviticus forbids a great number of things that modern Christians ignore. Why should they pay attention to that verse when they don't observe others?
    1
  1103. I would assume it is an intentional move on the part of the producers to try and confuse those present as Christianity has long been associated with anti-LGBTQ sentiments
    1
  1104. How so?
    1
  1105. And it was a Democrat who signed The Civil Rights Act....
    1
  1106. 1.5? What do you mean?
    1
  1107. The Satanists are atheists
    1
  1108. Are you suggesting that the questions and critiques of the astronomers and skeptics of astrology wouldn't hold up against somebody who has studied it for longer?
    1
  1109.  @Soulene  But I don't think the aim of this series is necessarily to always find a middle ground, but to see if it is even possible that one can be achieved. Even if people who studied astrology longer were brought in, I don't see how any middle ground would have been achieved.
    1
  1110. Says who?
    1
  1111. Why not?
    1
  1112.  @hannahfaithpadinit3125  The free will argument doesn't really hold up for the majority of Christians though
    1
  1113. Every Christian picks and chooses when it comes to the Bible
    1
  1114.  @GarciaonlyJesus  The fact that I can't interview every Christian is kind of the point. There are countless sects, churches and denominations, all believing their interpretation of the Bible is correct. And none of them can prove they are correct and others are wrong.
    1
  1115.  @GarciaonlyJesus  So you believe the Bible is to be taken completely literally?
    1
  1116.  @GarciaonlyJesus  So how do we know those scholars have the correct interpretation?
    1
  1117.  @GarciaonlyJesus  These people presumably got their degrees by being to successfully argue their case and back it up with evidence. So since you trust them, you must have analyzed their works and thought processes closely, right? So how did they arrive at their conclusions and how do we know they are correct?
    1
  1118.  @GarciaonlyJesus  Why do you assume I haven't done my homework? Simply because I clearly don't agree with you?
    1
  1119.  @GarciaonlyJesus  Yes, I am very familiar with the names you have listed and their attempts to back up their claims with evidence. They do not hold up under scrutiny
    1
  1120.  @GarciaonlyJesus  "So if you see the evidence and still don't think you have the truth well maybe you don't want to see it" No, I have seen what people claim to be evidence and no see no reason why anybody would accept it as such as it has no merit
    1
  1121. I don't think the church was brought up to justify a progressive mindset. It was brought up merely to point out that there are many churches out there who will not change with the times and move forward
    1
  1122.  @BigEvan96  Quite often throughout the book.
    1
  1123. Because in most cases people claiming to do that are being incredibly disingenuous
    1
  1124.  @astraeapurest  Do you believe that those who receive an abortion are likely headed to hell for their sin? Also, your username an Eric Nam reference?
    1
  1125.  @astraeapurest  But if somebody didn't repent, do you believe they are destined for hell and would you still say you love them?
    1
  1126.  @astraeapurest  So you would agree with a God that they are a terrible enough person that they deserve eternity in hell, but you would also love them...?
    1
  1127. You don't think it is the duty of the government to help the poor and needy in society?
    1
  1128. Why?
    1
  1129.  @justastrawberrymonst  Every Christian does that. There are horrible things permitted in the Bible that (hopefully) no modern Christian would support so they choose to ignore
    1
  1130.  @justastrawberrymonst  Slavery springs to mind. The Bible condones it, gives instructions on the purchasing of slaves, treatment of slaves, permissible levels of beating of said slaves, and never condemns it. Do you believe slavery to be acceptable as the Bible does?
    1
  1131.  @justastrawberrymonst  It condones it. As I said previously, it gives instructions on where your slaves may be purchased, allows you to beat your slaves, says you may pass ownership of your slaves to your children etc. It is not simply describing that slavery is in the world, it is giving instructions for followers of the Bible on how to engage in it. So with that being the case, do you think that slavery is acceptable? Because if you are going to embrace the entirety of the Bible word for word, you are unable to condemn it as immoral
    1
  1132.  WEST COAST  What a charmer you are
    1
  1133.  @o.o7299  How do you know the Bible is the Word of God?
    1
  1134. Who is lost?
    1
  1135.  @tmac7011  How so?
    1
  1136.  @tmac7011  If there is clear unquestionable evidence that Christianity is true, why is everybody not a Christian?
    1
  1137.  @tmac7011  I have weighed up all supposed evidence for the existence of God and do not find it sufficient to claim a God exists. So are you suggesting that after all my time looking into the matter, I simply rejected God's existence because it would be inconvenient for me if he was real? That's a very patronizing claim to make
    1
  1138.  @tmac7011  Well what are you basing that claim on? That it is indeed the case for many atheists that they reject obvious evidence on personal grounds? I have not read the book but I am very familiar with Frank's arguments .They are full of problems and have been refuted many times. The title of the book alone is nonsensical
    1
  1139.  @tmac7011  I don't know any atheists who use evidence to refute God. In fact there is no burden of proof on atheist to show a God does not exist. By definition most of atheists reject the claim a God exists because the evidence on the part of theists is insufficient. The vast majority of them. Frank is prone to committing logical fallacies within his arguments and showing a lack of understanding of the science he tries to speak about.
    1
  1140.  @tmac7011  I am not makinh a truth claim, stating that God definitely exists. I am saying I have found that the arguments and evidence of theists claiming as truth that a God exists, are insufficient to make such a claim. There are plenty of videos on this very platform of people debunking Frank's arguments
    1
  1141.  @tmac7011  No it doesn't and it its odd that you would use a courtroom analogy when it is a courtroom that be best used as an example to show why atheists do not have a burden of proof. If I accuse you of murder are you under any obligation to prove conclusively that you did not commit murder? No. Do you have to show who did in fact commit the murder instead of you? No. Do you even have to speak up in your defence? No (though it obviously helps). If I am accusing you of murder the only thing that is required is that I prove my claim beyond a reasonable doubt. Same with theists, if they claim a God exists, atheists do not have to offer up an alternative. The theist has to prove the truth of their claim
    1
  1142.  @tmac7011  An alternative is not required at all to reject a claim. There is another analogy that may work here. You and I are sitting in a room and are presented with a giant glass jar of jelly beans. We are asked to say how many jelly beans are inside. I look at you and say "Well obviously there is an even number inside". The man holding the jar looks at you and asks if you agree with me that there must be an even number inside. If you say no, you do not agree, it does not mean you are asserting there is an odd number inside, it does not mean that you are claiming there is NOT an even number. It simply means that you are rejecting my truth claim based on their being insufficient evidence to arrive at such a claim. You presenting an alternative theory as to the number of jelly beans is not required. It does not make me seem any more reasonable or unreasonable, the weakness of my claim has already been demonstrated
    1
  1143.  @tmac7011  Exactly. Every atheist I personally know has the same stance. I think the view that some have of atheists as being people who angrily declare with certainty that there is NO God is somewhat outdated. Rather I don't think there is enough reason or evidence to arrive at the conclusion that many claim. And I agree. I wish that people would evaluate their own beliefs more often.
    1
  1144.  @tmac7011  But that's the thing. There isn't an "atheist argument". Atheism is not making a claim, it is simply rejecting one. I don't think there has been any arguments presented that are sufficient enough to show the existence of a deity
    1
  1145.  @tmac7011  Problems with all of them that keep from being sufficient proof. The moral argument being that God is the source of all morality and therefore if objective morality exists, God must exist?
    1
  1146.  @tmac7011  Why does there have to be an objective morality?
    1
  1147.  @100liestotaly9  I don't know why you would direct people to Living Waters. Ray doesn't know what he's talking about half the time
    1
  1148.  @ingridcantrell1981  True. Very judgemental guy considering he is responsible for all of it
    1
  1149.  @BigEvan96  Who is trying to force churches?
    1
  1150.  @BigEvan96  I have never heard of anybody trying to force all churches. You have proof of that?
    1
  1151. "Why protest what you don't know." Because those who do believe in the Bible will often make decisions, informed by said belief that have great impact on non-believers. Objection is perfectly justified
    1
  1152. So anybody wearing blended fabrics is a sinner?
    1
  1153.  @misspikapika7972  The Bible has a verse saying "thou shalt not be progressive"?
    1
  1154.  @misspikapika7972  Every Christian picks and chooses from the Bible whether that be ignoring some parts or focusing more on others. It's why there is no unified Christian church
    1
  1155. I dunno. A basic google search from me found that religious LGBTQ youth are far more likely to attempt suicide than their non-religious peers
    1
  1156.  @petterrong1590  I am not sure. But even you must admit it is not hard to imagine that an LGBTQ youth raised in a household that follows a religion that constantly preaches that who they are is sinful, is more likely to feel lost, helpless and maybe suicidal?
    1
  1157. How do you know?
    1
  1158. How do you know God's word?
    1
  1159.  @joyven8591  By faith? So you dont know the Bible is God's word, you just believe it is
    1
  1160. Me: So Christ’s body is the bread? Priest: yes Me: and he rose from the grave Priest: yes... Me: because of the yeast? Priest: no Me: okay, none of this makes sense
    1
  1161. Well let's be clear know, it's not that Angel necessarily wants to be celibate, it's that he doesn't want to go to hell. Pretty big difference
    1
  1162.  @crazando  Right, he feels pressured to choose celibacy in order to avoid Hell
    1
  1163.  @crazando  How on earth is it a free and easy choice? It is completely different from a non-religious person making the choice to be celibate. Angel believes he must choose celibacy or face damnation. It's sad.
    1
  1164.  @crazando  "Hollywood idea of hell"? What exactly do you believe hell to be? Please elaborate on what you have been saying
    1
  1165. Psychics and Mediums are legit? Why would you say that?
    1
  1166. How so?
    1
  1167. @Çaesar Oh Caesar. Here you are posting again, confirming what I had already expected. You have run away from yet another conversation with me after being unable to back up what you were saying. Why start these conversations if you are unable to see them through?
    1
  1168. @Çaesar What am I lying about?
    1
  1169. Literally every Christian adapts the Bible to suit their needs. That's why their is no one unified Christian Church
    1
  1170. Exactly, even the conservative Christians in this video are picking and choosing parts of the Bible
    1
  1171. There are clearly progressive Christians. There are 3 in this video
    1
  1172.  @asap9224  Evidence proving God does not exist is not required. Especially should one be an agnostic atheist as I previously explained to you. You don't seem to understand how a burden of proof works. If a theist wants to claim a God exists the burden of proof lies with them to prove that claim, not an anybody else to disprove it
    1
  1173.  @asap9224  I would accept evidence in any form. The Kalam Cosmological argument is easily refuted and has been done so many times.
    1
  1174.  @asap9224  No, it has demonstrably been refuted. Many times. The fact that you think it is this unquestionably true argument is rather odd .Especially since if that were the case and it were undeniably true, we wouldn't even be having this discussion
    1
  1175.  @asap9224  There are plenty. If you were to simply search on youtube you.would find many. Of the notable youtube atheists, Matt Dilahunty, Rationality Rules, Paulogia, Cosmic Skeptic are all likely to have videos on it. Or you can simply type out the argument's premises as you believe them to be correct and I can refute it for you
    1
  1176.  @asap9224  Is that the best "I" can do? I haven't watched the video. You were apparently not able to simply search for one yourself on youtube so I merely named well known atheists who were likely to have a video on it so you could hear the well known counters to the argument. If you can give me the exact video title I will give it a watch. Also that is not even close to being fact.
    1
  1177.  @asap9224  I am serious. I told you there were well known criticisms of the argument out there, but you seemed unwilling to look into them yourself for some reason and demanded a video from me. So quite clearly directed you to well known atheists on youtube who were "likely to have one". I never claimed to have watched any video of theirs. I offered to watch the video afterwards if you gave me the title or even to discuss the argument were you to lay it out as you understand it, but you seem to have decided not to do either of those things. You seem to like accusing things of being fallacious and throwing terms around without fully understanding how they are used. For example it is virtually impossible for a single statement to be circular in its reasoning.... And I have previously explained to you why the majority of modern atheists don't believe we can say a god exists. Please look back at comment describing agnostic atheism
    1
  1178.  @asap9224  Atheism is by it's very definition a lack of belief. I have explained all of this to you previously. What is it you are still failing to understand?
    1
  1179.  @asap9224  I have explained this to you two times already. An agnostic atheist, which is how most modern atheists identify, do not claim to know with 100 certainty that a god does not exist, rather we state that that there is insufficient evidence to accept the claim that one does. We are not stating our own claim or belief, we are rejecting the claim of another. It is completely different
    1
  1180.  @asap9224  I am not just admitting this now, I outlined my position to you a long time before in this conversation. If you want to continue talking, please actually read what I say. I don;t like having to repeat myself. And that has nothing to do with atheism. The theory of a multiverse is tied up within theoretical physics and there are plenty of people who believe in aliens, including Christians. Neither has any impact on the existence of a deity
    1
  1181.  @asap9224  I don't believe in aliens and I don't believe in a multiverse. And what dawkins may or may not believe doesn't matter. An atheist makes their individual position based on their own individual evaluation of available evidence. I do not believe there is any evidence sufficient enough to claim that a God exists
    1
  1182.  @asap9224  Also, I looked up Dawkins and aliens. He never said he beleives in aliens, he discussed as one of many possible explanations for the origins of life. I suggest you look into it again
    1
  1183.  @asap9224  Why do you keep trying to bring these other things into the discussion? Not every athesit accepts there is alien life out there, or the theory of the multiverse etc. The only thing in common amongst atheists is a rejection of the claim that a God exists. And it says quite a lot that even though I have said countless times now I don't think there is evidence for God,instead of attempting to show there is, you instead are going off on some misguided tangent about aliens.
    1
  1184.  @asap9224  And I believe I told you, I will accept convincing evidence in any form. The Kalam Cosmological argument is not such evidence. If you would like me to detail why not, I would simply need to you to describe the argument as you believe it to be. This is an offer I have made to you several times now. Ok. But as I pointed out these are irrelevant to the matter at hand. The fact that atheists may believe in some other things simply means they believe there to be sufficient evidence present. They may be wrong about that. But it doesn't change the reasoning for not believing in God at all. I am not flip flopping at all. Please provide me one instance of that if you are going to make such an accusation
    1
  1185.  @asap9224  So just to confirm, you would like me to point out the problems referring to the wording used by Dr Craig? What proof is that? The work of Hubble is literally used as evidence for the Big Bang...
    1
  1186.  @asap9224  It's not an opinion that atheism is not a belief. We have been over this...
    1
  1187.  @asap9224  "The short bus has arrived"? What does mean? It's my first time hearing such a phrase. Ok. Let's look at the first premise of the argument, “Whatever begins to exist has a cause”. This is stated as if it is somehow intuitive fact when that is simply not the case. Why should we automatically assume, a priori, that it is simply impossible for an uncaused beginning to exist? There is also the fact that in using observations of causal relationships within the universe cannot be applied to the universe as a whole through inductive reasoning. We don't even have experience of the coming into being of anything remotely analogous to life itself or the creation of the universe. Add into this the fact that modern developments in the field of quantum physics weaken the first premise through the discovery of seemingly uncaused occurrences like quantum vacuum fluctuations. The second premise “The universe began to exist” suffers from an equivocation error when following on from the first premise. In the first instance, those things beginning to existence, that we have been able to experience and observe “beginning to exist” do so by some form of transformation of matter or energy. Key to their coming into being is a change of some state or process. However, in the second premise when referring to the universe, you are talking about a state in which there is no matter or energy to be transformed or reshaped into the universe and therefore you are dealing with two notions of “beginning to exist” that are not identical and therefore the syllogism being employed is invalid. That then means that the conclusion “The universe has a cause” fails. The argument is attempting to be a deductive argument, one that implies that should the first two premises be known to be true, then the conclusion follows on as necessarily true. That is simply not the case. Add on to that, that the argument proves nothing about God’s existence. Even IF one were to accept that it was a sound, valid argument, all you have done is prove the existence of a first cause. That could be a singular a cause, it could be multiple causes. If it is a deity it says nothing about the nature of the deity. It just doesn’t work as proof of the existence of a creator God.
    1
  1188.  @asap9224  Also just looked back, why did you ask if I was ready now? I was waiting this whole time for YOU to respond to my previous comment
    1
  1189.  @asap9224  Did you not read my giant comment refuting it....?
    1
  1190.  @asap9224  So I refute the argument and now you're silent...?
    1
  1191. Says who?
    1