Видео

Our christians tortured me as a child (not leaned on, tortured) for fifteen years to punish my father for his "sins" while the whole time telling me that it was their god doing it. I was there! I watched them torture me. They tell each other that I left their church to serve the devil. Incorrigible!

Jesus most likely didn’t exist.

You sure put a lot of effort into not believing in something.

Peter tatchell is an evil little man,why give this son of satan a voice?

I wish I had time to make videos. Bart the Skeptic in Ordinary Life. Bart: "Where's your really cool friend?" Ordinary Oscar: "he's really sick & has a fever of over 100 degrees." Bart: "Well, which ONE IS IT? Is he cool with some type of hypothermic condition or does he have a really high temperature???" Oscar: 'ahhhh, what?'

Bass getting emotional and appealing to consensus, as usual.

Im not athiest for any deep reason. Ive always been athiest. And ive met people with a thousand diff magic beliefs. Everything from worshiping different gods to healing crystals, to scientology. And none ive ever heard sounded any more convincing than the rest. Christians and muslims sound the same to me as girls believing in astrology or someone worshiping Thor.

Good try with the ambush, but Dr. Price is a real double PhD, not from diploma mills, and on top of that is an incredibly moral human being. It's like watching cavemen trying to ambush the Predator with their clubs against his nuclear wrist rockets. You had no chance!

Anthony has the patience of a saint. It seems to be the same tactic over and over. Shotgun proof texts, ignore the vast majority of the Scriptural opposition, and move on as fast as possible, declaring victory. Anthony made me curious, and I learned what Unitarians believe. To me the Trinity is an obvious post Scriptural fabrication at this point. One who says they know all is always wrong, but one who says I may be wrong, is always right.

Because you don't understand what Yeshua (Jesus) meant by saying "in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holly Spirit".

No! The days of Genesis 1 were God's work days and Genesis 2:2-3 tells us that he now rests from his creative activity on day 7, which has not yet ended. There is no mention of the age of the Earth.

Dr Price firing on all cylinders here!

A tour de force demonstration of new testament exposition by Dr Price. Excellent stuff!

As a Muslim, I respectfully disagree that the original sin was racism simply because we can also argue that it is a racism to ask a creature to bow down to another creature. I believe that God the almighty created Adam peace be upon him with a specific characteristics for a specific purpose to do specific tasks which no other creature can do. For example angels can not be khalifs to the creator on earth simply because they are made out of light and they were made in a way that makes them follow instructions only so if they won't be given instructions and orders they don't know where to go or how to do, also Ginn, they can not be khalifs because they are made out of fire, they can damage intentionally or unintentionally anything that feeds the purpose of having khalifs on earth. The idea that racism is the original sin is a bit abrubtly obsurd and honestly I felt it was given in a context of trying to appeal and fit in the western society which assumes they are having a challenging with this concept and I agree. My humble opinion is that arrogance is one of the characters of any devil or any disobedience but racism is being biased and completely unacceptable of another race. And that will mean that Iblis or Ginn were a race and that would be another conflict that simply distracts people from the main conflict we have with devil. The problem is that devil or Iblis wanted to be the best of everything, he wanted to be the best worshipper and then the best disobedient. He can not stand the idea of being the second best so he gave in completely. He could not take the idea of bowing to a creature even if this was an order from the creator whom he worshipped for God knows for how long. God knew he was not sincere about his worshipping and knew all of this would happen so he wanted to expose him to himself and to human race so we can all understand that disobedience is clearly a sign of insincerity with God and that arrogance is a heart sickness that falls behind the disobedience. Here comes the importance of self-accounting, which is better than self-criticism. God does not want us to be self-criticising ourselves, rather, He wants us to hold ourselves accountable for our mistakes. It was so nice listening to your presentation Dr. Fadel.

Hitchens was right.

5:13 bookmark

Luke's social, political and geographical minutia can be the fingerprints of Marcion in Luke. Marcion s claimed to have had an "early" version of Luke. Could it be the original and his? Marcion owned a shipping fleet he inherited. He would have been shipboard since he was old enough to sail. He would've been a man of the world. HE'D know this kind of detail of the wider world.

The "conservative" who tried to turn this into a debate on Josephus is both rude, obstinant and a dyed in the wool apologist. The passage in Josephus book 20 is NOT about "The" james and jesus it is about "a" james and jesus. And he's simply engaging in the appeal to authority fallacy. Was jesus's father named Damneus? No. Was James ever in line for the Jerusalem temple high priesthood? No. Was jesus ever given the high priesthood? No. He is both dishonest and obnoxious.

A Question for both sides: Believing that Jesus is The Only Begotten Son of God, obeying his directives , Having him as your exemplar and imitating what he Did while to the degree that you life allows it. Isn’t that enough?

People not unlike the blue shirt dude, who wave and use their hands while speaking like this, they are doing a form of sorcery.

Overall, if Muhammad was alive today he'd have made a dandy school shooter.

The doctrine of trinity is incomprehensible

The man in the blue did not come to listen.

2:33:02 Whoever says Satam the Administrator Enlil the Enlightened the Quantum Ai who runs every pixel of your vision does not exist is actually run by IT

If everyone knew the trinity was in the Bible then why were they still arguing about it in the 300’s.

Stop using books outside of the Bible. Who cares what any church father says.

How come Jesus said His Father is greater then Himself

How can one person be three people? 😂😂😂😂😂

How come Paul never called Jesus God after His resurrection.

Paul always separates God and Jesus.

This is getting way more complicated then it has to be. The Bible says God can’t die. If Jesus is God then how did He die?

Trinitarians are not smart people

The Bible calls Moses God. Is he God? No

Stop using books. Use your KJB.

Sorry your full of crap. Paul never calls Jesus God.

Can you find a verse where Paul uses a word to call Jesus God. Anything outside the book of John.!

Jews do not believe in a Trinity. As a matter of fact no one did until the pagan Roman emperor Constantine and his council. Paul never spoke of a Trinity and Paul wrote all of our church doctrine and theology.

(12 September 2023, 08:00 a.m.) Professor Donald B. Redford, an Egyptologist, has argued that the Bible's Exodus is a myth and never happened as portrayed in Scripture. However, Redford understands there is a historical kernel or event behind the Bible's Exodus. Redford understands that the Hyksos Expulsion from Egypt of circa 1530 BC is what is behind the Bible's fictional Exodus of circa 1446 BC (cf. 1 Kings 6:1 for this date of 1446 BC). (cf. Donald B. Redford. 1992. _Egypt, Canaan, and Israel in Ancient Times._ Princeton University Press. Princeton, New Jersey) Redford (1992:412-413): "Despite the lateness and unreliability of the story in Exodus, no one can deny that the tradition of Israel's coming out of Egypt was one of long standing...There is only one chain of historical events that can accommodate this late tradition, and that is the Hyksos descent and occupation of Egypt...The memory of this major event in the history of the Levant survived not only in Egyptian sources. It would be strange indeed if the West Semitic speaking population of the Palestine, whence the invaders had come in MB IIB, had not also preserved in their folk memory the great moment of (for them) glory. And in fact it is in the Exodus account that we are confronted with the Canaanite version of this event...In sum, therefore, we may state that the memory of the Hyksos expulsion did indeed live on in the folklore of the Canaanite population of the southern Levant..." Redford understands that the Exodus account is of the Exilic or Post Exilic age, the 6th or 5th century BC: (page 418): "...Moses, in all his roles, is late, either Exilic or post-Exilic...it is literary artifice, not history..."

Amazing! Such a shame that Erhman has hardenet his heart so much and its sad to see. But as it is written: "23 And if they do not persist in unbelief, they will be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again. " Romans 11:23. Praying that God enlightens Bart Ehrman so he can see that the Gospel of Jesus Christ is the only way to heaven.

I don't get this tactic of saying: "Would you believe I had a pet dragon if there were 500 witnesses?" It would significantly raise my credence, but not enough to overcome the prior, which is very low. If a sufficient cumulative case could be made though, eventually the prior could be overcome. For example, if a significant portion of the scholarly and philosophical community thought that some people had pet dragons, if there were numerous other, similar instances where testimony and other written records purport to record pet dragons, if I knew of various philosophical arguments that raised my credence in the existence of pet dragons, etc. I really want to be charitable, but it seems sometimes that counterapologists don't adequately understand cumulative cases or bayes' theorem or evidentialism. Just because one piece of evidence taken on its own doesn't overcome a prior, that doesn't mean that this evidence is worthless, as Doug seems to imply (If this isn't what he is implying, it's hard for me to see what he is). They forego terms like "prior probability" and "weak/strong evidence" for vague, unhelpful terms like, "big claim" and, "good/bad evidence." Maybe I am misinterpreting the point Doug is trying to bring to light. If anyone can correct me please do

a unit on evidentialism should be required in schools

Counterapologists like Doug get so much mileage out of this idea of "big" claims vs "small" claims. The only way I can make sense of what that means is in terms of priors, like Lydia did. But when you substitute, "claims with low priors," for "big claims," suddenly these things Doug says don't make much sense as objections.

I’m always amazed at how trinitarians will do anything to complicate the simplest and most straightforward of bible truths. The argument that pre christian jews were binarian or trinitarian is a flawed. argument. Why? Because the law emphatically was to worship One God (Yahweh) and no other. He is a “jealous God, who wants exclusive devotion. TRUE jews/Israelites following the law absolutely did not worship multiple Gods. As a whole the OT explicitly shows they did however not following the law and took on gods from egypt (triune), Babylon, which they again as a whole were punished severely for. By the time of Jesus they were doing all kinds of abominations. Even that trinitarianism has taken root by a majority shouldn’t be surprising as Yahweh himself called them a stubborn, stiff necked people with no understanding. Like always there are a small minority who held true to that old law covenant for Israelites and jews and today a small amount of Christians who realize the truth that Jesus the Messiah and Son of God taught and tried to explain. Mainstream christianity trinitarians are doing exactly what disobedient Israel did. Idolatry (most of them completely aware however as even the leaders have been misled from early christian post apostle “fathers” and “creeds”. An amazing slight of hand by the devil if I may say so.

David Fitzgerald is awsome,his writings are clear and he has strenghened my atheism to a new plateau.

We all have a will, but it is not free. It is enslaved and dead in sin until we are regenerate.

Amazing video

I'm writing down notes, and posting them, as they might be useful to someone else too Habits without numbers: preference for complex over simple theories "followed a tradition" when it could easily be an eyewitness directly recording what they were there to see everything is a redaction everything is static. people don't move around, people don't leave or join groups, things don't take place over a period of time projecting postmodernism on the ancients: "the ancients didn't care about facts, they cared about stories, which are more truly true than truth". that's not true of the ancients, but it is true of postmoderns. "I guess if this is something we do in the discipline, it must be okay" ultimately, it seems like they're treating the texts as if they were merely texts, and the only operations on texts were to (A) make stuff up or (B) change stuff that someone else made up. they don't want them to have a connection to reality. Habit 1: failure to make crucial distinctions - using two distinct meanings for "telescoping" or "compression" --telescoping 1: "the guy version" --telescoping 2: changing facts in a misleading way - using two distinct meanings for "non-chronological order" --achronological: usually uses "and" to indicate that both things happened, without saying which was first --dyschronological: lying about when something happened - using two senses of "ipsissima vox" (the very voice) --ipsissima vox 1: recognizable paraphrase --ipsissima vox 2: changing words unrecognizably, like from "My God, My God, why have you forsaken me?" to "I thirst" Habit 2: failure to recognize when a variation is just a variation - not everything is redaction, sometimes people just remember or word things a little differently - trying to fix a problem that isn't there, because there's no discrepancy to resolve Habit 3: arguments from silence Habit 4: ignoring the possibility of independent access to events Habit 5: overreading Habit 6: redefining reliability to make it less significant - if you think something is reliable, you would naturally try harmonizing with something else reliable Tips to avoid these bad habits: Tip 1: recognize these errors Tip 2: always read the text yourself - don't believe them if they make claims about the text until you've read it yourself and you see they're not wrong Tip 3: check everything out yourself - don't think you need a credential to understand things - only arguments and evidence matter. facts and logic. if they don't have that, it doesn't matter what else they have Tip 4: harmonization is not religious - historically reliable sources harmonize. they fit together like reality fits together, because they're reflections of reality. apparent discrepancies that harmonize are evidence of reliability, not unreliability. Tip 5: reinstate the notion of casual variation - variation is normal. when there are multiple witnesses, there are variations in the details that catch the eye of each. Tip 6: read old books - C. S. Lewis quote: "Every age has its own outlook; it is specially good at seeing certain truths and specially liable to make certain mistakes. We all, therefore, need the books that correct the characteristic mistakes of our own period. And that means the old books. All contemporary writers share, to some extent, the contemporary outlook. Even those, like myself, who seem most opposed to it. Nothing strikes me more when I read the controversies of past ages, than the fact that both sides were usually assuming, without question, a good deal which we should now absolutely deny. They thought they were as completely opposed as two sides could be, but in fact, they were all the time secretly united, united with each other, and against earlier and later ages by a great mass of common assumptions. We may be sure that the characteristic blindness of the 20th century, the blindness about which posterity will ask, "But how could they have thought that?", lies where we have never suspected it, and concerns something about which there is untroubled agreement between Hitler and President Roosevelt, or between Mr. H. G. Wells and Karl Barth. None of us can fully escape this blindness, but we shall certainly increase it, and weaken our guard against it, if we read only modern books. Where they are true, they will give us truths that we half knew already, where they are false, they will aggravate the error with which we are already dangerously ill. The only palliative is to keep the clean sea breeze of the centuries blowing through our minds, and this can be done only by reading old books. Not, of course, that there is any magic about the past; people were no cleverer then than they are now. They made as many mistakes as we. But not the same mistakes. They will not flatter us in the errors we are already committing. And their own errors, being now open and palpable, will not endanger us. Two heads are better than one, not because either are infallible, but because they are unlikely to go wrong in the same direction. To be sure, the books of the future would be just as good a corrective as the books of the past, but unfortunately, we cannot get at them." Unnumbered tips: scholars don't seem to stop and ask themselves if they're being consistent some scholars take "midrash" to mean the wholesale fabrication of events that never occurred, which is not what midrash actually is

The Bible book is 'a book' hahah!... and that is the total extent of your evidence to prove your god? The Bible is Fiction..! a Historical novel - ie a Fictional story using Historical events and peoples: This 'Bable' book is backed up by absolutely no facts and no evidence for gods...! It is a 'historical Novel', It is not proof for any god(s) Historical novel: The fables are intertwined within historical places and people.... eg Egypt and the Pharaohs existed, whereas Moses did NOT exist, and the Exodus did not happen... ! A 'global' flood never occurred on Earth! That David/Solomon are fables...! Jonah swallowed by a fish.....! 'Burning bush'? Those 'fasting' shamans were hallucinating, and usually on the local drugs...

If Jesus is devine and eternal, a selestial beeing that has always existed in the heavens... *why is thos 30 odd years on earth so important⁉️*

2 Ki 4:9 And she said unto her husband, Behold now, I perceive that this is an holy man of God, which passeth by us continually. 10 Let us make a little chamber, I pray thee, on the wall; and let us set for him there a bed, and a table, and a stool, and a candlestick: and it shall be, when he cometh to us, that he shall turn in thither. Here they had a table. Way back then. Why would it be so unusual to have a table for scrolls?