32:00 - 34:07 is an incredible segment I've loved for years. Most Christians take for granted that the Bible is exactly what God wants us to know, without realizing books are a product of human invention. We. Made. It. ALL. Up. Period. ✌️😴
As for the "creation" of the animals in genesis, I find it strange and odd that the god character only "created" the animals known about AT THAT TIME, and by THOSE writers. How weird... 🙄
The 'Big Bang' model is not 'something from nothing', irrespective of what language you present such drivel in. The 'Big Bang' model does not suggest 'something from nothing'. To state otherwise is only to reveal that you don't fully understand the 'Big Bang' model to begin with. It suggests a SINGULARITY. Not a 'nothing'.
If the god of the bible had been portrayed as a king instead of a God , he would be remembered as the most evil, mass murdering, tyrannical dictator of all time! Christians give the bible god a free pass because, they say, he is god the creator. I don't see the difference whether man or god. If his actions were evil or immoral, as the bible states, then he'd be just as guilty of being evil as any human committing the same deeds.
~ All this king this and lord that medieval language speaks volumes about where many callers are mired. The bad old days. Also, I am still SMH as to how unprepared called were and are when they ring you all to "discuss." Thank you, Tracie and Matt, five years later (2019). Cheers, DAVEDJ ~
Its the language of the king James version of the bible. Its memorized and regurgitated. Its also rampant in the hymns, sung over and over throughout a lifetime.
Also, in many of the newer versions of the bible (NIV, NASB, etc) the word LORD in all caps replaced any name associated with any gods (Yahweh but also El) which further muddies the translations, and also has generations memorizing the word LORD into the vernacular.
But I just hide a ride with dr who and we saw dinosaurs reading the bible. Only went back 24 hours. So it is true. He is e pist 'em ooologically somewhere..
Here is a comment on 36 minutes in. She is talking about Elohim in the Old Testament being referred to as singular we're in every other writing is considered plural. You will also find in the New Testament Jesus himself says specifically is it not written in your law I have said you are Elohim. God. If you were to ask a Christian if they believe that they are God's the answer, due to their indoctrination is a resounding no. Yet that is exactly the opposite of what Jesus himself taught. It's in John 34. He was almost stoned for saying that we are Elohim. Elohim is the word for the god. The Bible also says specifically that Christ is all and in all. Colossians 10:34. If you were to ask a Christian if they believe that the answer is no. Once again and I true nation teaching that their own Bible is a lie. When Jesus says we are gods he is referring to Psalms 82:6 in the Old Testament. And in the Old Testament they refer to Elohim as the god. Also in the Bible it says that all things manifest are made of light. Then in John 1:5 it says that God is light. Confirming Colossians 10:34, John 34 and The other Bible verses that confirm that God is all things. It's amazing the links that Christian Seminary and indoctrination go to to hide the thousands of discrepancies between modern Christianity and its original teaching. That's not even counting all of the modifications that have been done to scripture. Primarily the omissions and books that are left out or condemned as heresy. The Gospel of Thomas being an example of one of those. The Gospel of Thomas is older than the majority of the other books in Scripture. I told a friend of mine about this. He decided to read the Gospel of Thomas after I asked him to. When he was finish reading it I asked him what he thought. He said that book is heresy. The things that are taught in that book are not Christian. I said that's awful funny because more than 54% of the entire Gospel of Thomas it's already in your Bible and he called specific aspects of the Gospel of Thomas heresy. Specifically the ones that are already in his Bible LOL. if you were to ask if Ashura was a consort of Yahweh the answer would be an absolute no. Yet that is a part of the Christian tradition. An ignored part of it. A hidden part now. if you were to ask a Christian if Jesus is a priest in the order of Melchizedek the answer will be a resounding no because they have no idea about their own Bible. They don't know shit about shit when it comes to their own holy book and that includes many phds I have debated. If there is a PhD or someone who thinks they know Christianity and they want to put me to the test I have more than a thousand nine hundred debates under my belt and I will be glad to put the whoop ass on you. that is if you are proselytizing for modern-day Christianity as truth.
Matt can't say, absolutely, that someone's personal experience is of no use in convincing others -- I thought it was obvious that many people believe without question personal experiences of others particularly within their group.
Matt is saying it cannot be of any use in convincing others, he is not saying others are not convinced. People can obviously convinced by bad evidence.
@@theunrepentantatheist24 Actually, I left a "no" out in my comment. "...whatever the personal experience was...it's of absolutely NO use in convincing others." You're agreeing that's what Matt said -- but you haven't refuted my point at all. You seem to agree that personal experience can be of use!
@@David_Span Yes you are right. Someone's personal experience can be useful in convincing others. I think Matt should have said and probably meant is: "While many people are persuaded to believe in claims (of this nature) based on others' experiences - it is irrational on a number of grounds and cannot be sufficient evidence to warrant belief".
Matt made a similar error with Holy Rebel - saying about his prophetic dreams - "they may convince him he is in touch with god - but could not and should not convince anyone else." It is obvious part of this is false - as they might well convince gullible others.
@@theunrepentantatheist24 I get your point. But I feel that it's more Matt's arrogance and impatience that leads him to slip into that. But it's not really about people's gullibility -- you've also got to understand how our evolved brains work and how influential personal experiences of others in the group can be, especially when its consistent with how you've been brought up to understand how the world works. There are pretty good reasons why religious/supernatural beliefs persist, how strongly they can be held, and how effective they can be.
First caller 41:00
Second caller 1:05:43
Third caller 1:10:55
Fourth caller 1:12:08
Fifth caller 1:17:52
Just go to the description.
32:00 - 34:07 is an incredible segment I've loved for years. Most Christians take for granted that the Bible is exactly what God wants us to know, without realizing books are a product of human invention.
We. Made. It. ALL. Up.
Period. ✌️😴
try getting a thiest to admit to that
"We grant you that evolution is wrong, now prove creation"
"Creation is right because evolution is wrong"
WoW...
As for the "creation" of the animals in genesis, I find it strange and odd that the god character only "created" the animals known about AT THAT TIME, and by THOSE writers. How weird... 🙄
24:55 This bit about Marcion is very illuminating 🤔📚🚫✝️ The “word of god” is merely an old scrapbook with countless re-edits.
The 'Big Bang' model is not 'something from nothing', irrespective of what language you present such drivel in. The 'Big Bang' model does not suggest 'something from nothing'. To state otherwise is only to reveal that you don't fully understand the 'Big Bang' model to begin with.
It suggests a SINGULARITY.
Not a 'nothing'.
That's too funny. I signed this letter so you know it is not a forgery. Paul.
Sounds like something a person who would Forge a document would say LOL
If the god of the bible had been portrayed as a king instead of a God , he would be remembered as the most evil, mass murdering, tyrannical dictator of all time! Christians give the bible god a free pass because, they say, he is god the creator. I don't see the difference whether man or god. If his actions were evil or immoral, as the bible states, then he'd be just as guilty of being evil as any human committing the same deeds.
21:46 one of my favorite clips
"...lemme explain this...look...fuk you...".
That's actually one of the better thought out arguments from a caller I've heard.
Props.
~ All this king this and lord that medieval language speaks volumes about where many callers are mired. The bad old days. Also, I am still SMH as to how unprepared called were and are when they ring you all to "discuss."
Thank you, Tracie and Matt, five years later (2019). Cheers, DAVEDJ ~
Its the language of the king James version of the bible. Its memorized and regurgitated. Its also rampant in the hymns, sung over and over throughout a lifetime.
Also, in many of the newer versions of the bible (NIV, NASB, etc) the word LORD in all caps replaced any name associated with any gods (Yahweh but also El) which further muddies the translations, and also has generations memorizing the word LORD into the vernacular.
Oh garwd
in ur last video I commented why don't westerns mention Persian mythology and Zoroastrianism lol. and here we are. Apologies!
The caller Rick at 1:29 sounds suspiciously like Ray Comfort?
I was thinking that too
first caller sounds very confused, and offers no proof of his sky daddy
But evolution dinosaur apes were big banged because the bible says so therefore god.
But I just hide a ride with dr who and we saw dinosaurs reading the bible.
Only went back 24 hours. So it is true. He is e pist 'em ooologically somewhere..
The first caller is hilarious!
There are people AND monkeys!
I hurt now. Want to have recompense.
*Kolob
Here is a comment on 36 minutes in. She is talking about Elohim in the Old Testament being referred to as singular we're in every other writing is considered plural. You will also find in the New Testament Jesus himself says specifically is it not written in your law I have said you are Elohim. God. If you were to ask a Christian if they believe that they are God's the answer, due to their indoctrination is a resounding no. Yet that is exactly the opposite of what Jesus himself taught. It's in John 34. He was almost stoned for saying that we are Elohim. Elohim is the word for the god. The Bible also says specifically that Christ is all and in all. Colossians 10:34. If you were to ask a Christian if they believe that the answer is no. Once again and I true nation teaching that their own Bible is a lie. When Jesus says we are gods he is referring to Psalms 82:6 in the Old Testament. And in the Old Testament they refer to Elohim as the god. Also in the Bible it says that all things manifest are made of light. Then in John 1:5 it says that God is light. Confirming Colossians 10:34, John 34 and The other Bible verses that confirm that God is all things. It's amazing the links that Christian Seminary and indoctrination go to to hide the thousands of discrepancies between modern Christianity and its original teaching. That's not even counting all of the modifications that have been done to scripture. Primarily the omissions and books that are left out or condemned as heresy. The Gospel of Thomas being an example of one of those. The Gospel of Thomas is older than the majority of the other books in Scripture. I told a friend of mine about this. He decided to read the Gospel of Thomas after I asked him to. When he was finish reading it I asked him what he thought. He said that book is heresy. The things that are taught in that book are not Christian. I said that's awful funny because more than 54% of the entire Gospel of Thomas it's already in your Bible and he called specific aspects of the Gospel of Thomas heresy. Specifically the ones that are already in his Bible LOL.
if you were to ask if Ashura was a consort of Yahweh the answer would be an absolute no. Yet that is a part of the Christian tradition. An ignored part of it. A hidden part now. if you were to ask a Christian if Jesus is a priest in the order of Melchizedek the answer will be a resounding no because they have no idea about their own Bible. They don't know shit about shit when it comes to their own holy book and that includes many phds I have debated. If there is a PhD or someone who thinks they know Christianity and they want to put me to the test I have more than a thousand nine hundred debates under my belt and I will be glad to put the whoop ass on you.
that is if you are proselytizing for modern-day Christianity as truth.
LOL - Cheeta and Tarzan ... the end
More calls, less lecture please.
Are you lecturing? ; )
I found all of this very interesting. It lead me on a Google rabbit trail for almost an hour.
Thinking proves intelligent design false. Xxxxxxxxxxxx
Matt can't say, absolutely, that someone's personal experience is of no use in convincing others -- I thought it was obvious that many people believe without question personal experiences of others particularly within their group.
Matt is saying it cannot be of any use in convincing others, he is not saying others are not convinced. People can obviously convinced by bad evidence.
@@theunrepentantatheist24 Actually, I left a "no" out in my comment. "...whatever the personal experience was...it's of absolutely NO use in convincing others."
You're agreeing that's what Matt said -- but you haven't refuted my point at all. You seem to agree that personal experience can be of use!
@@David_Span Yes you are right. Someone's personal experience can be useful in convincing others. I think Matt should have said and probably meant is: "While many people are persuaded to believe in claims (of this nature) based on others' experiences - it is irrational on a number of grounds and cannot be sufficient evidence to warrant belief".
Matt made a similar error with Holy Rebel - saying about his prophetic dreams - "they may convince him he is in touch with god - but could not and should not convince anyone else." It is obvious part of this is false - as they might well convince gullible others.
@@theunrepentantatheist24 I get your point. But I feel that it's more Matt's arrogance and impatience that leads him to slip into that. But it's not really about people's gullibility -- you've also got to understand how our evolved brains work and how influential personal experiences of others in the group can be, especially when its consistent with how you've been brought up to understand how the world works. There are pretty good reasons why religious/supernatural beliefs persist, how strongly they can be held, and how effective they can be.
..blah blah blah and 38mins passed.......