I don't know if you'll see this 2 days later, but, here goes: your channel kept showing up in my feed. This was my first view. I've saved it to my "favorites" folder. I've always been a needy follower. It took me until age 60 to leave Christianity. I realized I'd believed for bad reasons. But I didn't want to disbelieve for bad reasons, either. I spent my first couple of years as an atheist listening to atheist vs theist debates, & reading a lot of perspectives. I remain an atheist. You made some cogent points here. I'm still learning. Thanks! ❤️
My grandmother died of cancer shortly before I was born, and she was cremated. If a Christian prayed in the name of Jesus that she would be raised from the dead, and my mother and I could watch her ashes reassemble into a human body that looked like my grandma, talked like my grandma, and had memories that only my grandma would have, I'd become the most devout Christian you've ever seen. No, I wouldn't know for 100% absolute fact that Jesus exists or that there isn't some very rare natural cause that can do that. But I'll be damned if my confidence in Jesus wouldn't be at an all-time high. But according to Trent, that'd be committing the GOTG fallacy. Interesting... Also, isn't he basically admitting that his philosophical justifications are garbage? If he thinks that accepting legitimate bodily resurrection as evidence that Jesus exists is committing a GOTG fallacy, then why does he think that simple existence is justification of anything supernatural? Existence is commonplace. At least with a resurrection it would be exceptionally rare.
That's what I always said. If I could witness my grandmother coming back from the dead, and then watch her ascend into heaven, that would send my confidence in Jesus right into the stratosphere. Or if everyone on earth had a Damascus experience like Paul had, there wouldn't be one person who would be doubting god's existence. It seems like that should be simple enough for an all-powerful god to do, and yet the silence continues.
I gave the same kind of examples before when I was asked what could change my mind (as an atheist who was a christian a few years back). But now, when I try to imagine this kind of event actually happening to me, I realize that I would think I am crazy (or hallucinating) before thinking of becoming a christian again. That is because of all the other very good arguments against christianity that would be still not answered, and still make christianity extremely hard to accept. Like if some huge miracle event with a voice shout to me an obvious contradiction like "P and not P". It would be very impressive, but my mind couldn't accept the contradiction.
Trent is not actually using the god of the gaps fallacy correctly. GOTG is about when we don't have an explanation. If someone told you they were going to raise your grandma in the name of Jesus before it actually happened then that would be the explanation, and wouldn't be GOTG. Trent is just talking out of his ass when he brings up GOTG. GOTG is a specific version of the appeal to ignorance fallacy which is a type of affirming the consequent fallacy, or Post hoc ergo propter hoc. Telling someone you will raise granny, and then raising granny is not affirming the consequent since you told them before it happened.
Wait just a frickin' minute... what a massive hypocrisy for Trent to poo poo the call for a demonstration of miracles that would possibly change minds about the existence of God. His own church has a process of conferring Sainthood based on the evaluation a person's ability to manifest miracles during and after their life.
While I was still in that church I really did believe in some of the miracle stories, especially when it comes to apparitions attributed to the Virgin Mary such as the ones from Fatima or Lourdes. However, even back then when it comes to the canonization process I found it strange that not always the church (or the people involved) showed the medical records if there were claims of healing for example, I actually had a similar mentality to his on why perhaps God simply doesn't show himself up to everyone for example as I thought that even then not everyone would accept what he asked of us so that's why faith was needed.
I think Trent is saying 1) Barker says hallucination is more likely than a miracle. 2) Barker says a miracle that he experiences is what it would take to prove god's existence 3) Therefore Barker is engaging in a fallacious statement... clearly he thinks a miracle is not a hallucination when it happens to him. Trent's problem is not acknowledging the public nature of the miracle Barker proposes... many people can witness the number in the envelope on the stage, and the witnesses are not all cult followers predisposed to think the same thing.. many expect it not to happen. Also, presumably Trent is honest, not a huckster trying to trick Barker. Barker may disagree with him, but does not think him a liar. Can Trent say the same?
“Love your neighbor, be respectful”, worship me. Or I’ll torture you forever! Thanks Walter! Sums up Christianity. I’m not randomly going to love my neighbor without reason. I’ll pass until I know them. Jesus advise sucks.
Walter’s a great example of how Christianity doesn’t just teach believers how to be Christian, it teaches them all sorts of ways to keep convincing themselves it’s true and that nothing else can be, many of which boil down to avoiding simple questions (“it’s not that simple!” “What about Bart Ehrman?” “Muslims are wrong just because!”) and, Dory-like, to just keep preachin’.
_”…Christianity doesn’t just teach believers how to be Christian, it teaches them all sorts of ways to keep convincing themselves it’s true and that nothing else can be…”_ YES!! I think that’s what _”truly born again”_ really means. The Bible’s description of _”born again”_ can’t be observed, nor demonstrated. If we go by what we observe, and what’s repeatable and what’s being demonstrated, what do we see? Christians continually convincing themselves that the irrational things they believe are true. That’s why people like John MacArthur and Mat Chandler say stuff like, _”people walk away from the faith because they were never _*_truly_*_ born again,”_ which really means they started thinking rationally.
@@nuttysquirrel8816 as someone raised Catholic in my case there'd be a bit of gaslighting and then being told that I didn't really understand church doctrine properly or something (I used to look down on some apostates as being simpletons especially if they converted to the megachurches or something similar to those). Listening and reading stuff from ex-Mormons there's something called a "testimony" and it seems that it's folks trying to show and affirm to themselves and others that they know for sure that the church they believe in really is the Truth.
At 29:28, Pine Creek made an interesting and clever remark about first century skeptics. I believe certain Bible verses exist because of those skeptics. According to historians and Bible scholars, before manuscripts were written, Christianity was spread by solely by word of mouth for at least the first thirty-five years after Jesus’ execution. (google Christian oral tradition). It seems plausible that first century Christians had to encounter skeptics, so counter arguments were developed. Since Christians can’t produce empirical evidence, counter arguments had place the blame of unbelief on skeptics. I believe that’s why there are Bible verses that say _”a sewer went forth to sow, but some seed fell on stony ground,”_ and _”the natural man can not receive the spiritual things of God,”_ and _”the evidence of God’s existence is clear but skeptics are suppressing the truth in unrighteousness,”_ and so on and so forth.
For Walter: No one has the slightest physical evidence to support a historical Jesus; no artifacts, dwelling, works of carpentry, or self-written manuscripts. All claims about Jesus derive from writings of other people. There occurs no contemporary Roman record that shows Pontius Pilate executing a man named Yeshua Ben Yosef (which would have been the name recorded). There occurs not a single contemporary writing that mentions Jesus. All documents about Jesus came well after the life of the alleged Jesus from either: unknown authors, people who had never met an earthly Jesus, or from fraudulent, mythical or allegorical writings. Just before and during the first century, the Jews had prophesied about an upcoming Messiah based on Jewish scripture. Their beliefs influenced many of their followers. We know that powerful beliefs can create self-fulfilling prophesies, and surely this proved just as true in ancient times. It served as a popular dream expressed in Hebrew Scripture for the promise of an "end-time" with a savior to lead them to the promised land. Indeed, Roman records show executions of several would-be Messiahs, (but not a single record mentions a Jesus). Many ancients believed that there could come a final war against the "Sons of Darkness"-- the Romans. This then could very well have served as the ignition and flame for the future growth of Christianity. Biblical scholars tell us that the early Christians lived within pagan communities. Jewish scriptural beliefs coupled with the pagan myths of the time give sufficient information about how such a religion could have formed. Many of the Hellenistic and pagan myths parallel so closely to the alleged Jesus that to ignore its similarities means to ignore the mythological beliefs of history. Dozens of similar savior stories propagated the minds of humans long before the alleged life of Jesus. Virtually nothing about Jesus "the Christ" came to the Christians as original or new. For example, the religion of Zoroaster, founded circa 628-551 B.C.E. in ancient Persia, roused mankind in the need for hating a devil, the belief of a paradise, last judgment and resurrection of the dead. Mithraism, an offshoot of Zoroastrianism influenced early Christianity. The Magi described in the New Testament appears as Zoroastrian priests. Note the word "paradise" came from the Persian pairidaeza. Osiris, Hercules, Hermes, Prometheus, Perseus, Romulus, and others compare to the Christian myth. According to Patrick Campbell of "The Mythical Jesus", all served as pre-Christian sun gods, yet all allegedly had gods for fathers, virgins for mothers; had their births announced by stars; had tyrants who tried to kill them in their infancy; met violent deaths; rose from the dead; and nearly all got worshiped by "wise men" and had allegedly fasted for forty days. Even Justin Martyr recognized the analogies between Christianity and Paganism. To the Pagans, he wrote: "When we say that the Word, who is first born of God, was produced without sexual union, and that he, Jesus Christ, our teacher, was crucified and died, and rose again, and ascended into heaven; we propound nothing different from what you believe regarding those whom you esteem sons of Jupiter (Zeus)." [First Apology, ch. xxi]
1:18:22 Doug's channel perfectly summarized-- "Heeey I had this Christian on, and I asked him this question, and he said HAHAA, and he said HOOHOO, and look, you see!? I was right!!"
Great show Doug. Loved the challenge to Christians inviting them to travel with you on your time machine. Hello from Australia. I agree, let's see more miracles.
Christian Walter made the same arguments that a Muhammadan would make. Yet, Muhammadans will listen to Christian Walter and find his arguments unbelievable. Christian Walter said that Jesus was a special person who changed the world, and that the Bible is the most amazing book. Muhammadans would say that Muhammad was an special person who inspired the creation of a new religion, and that Muhammad's Quran is a miraculous book unlike any other.
At least Trent could correctly state what Dan had written and thus rule out giving a wrong answer. Because none of us think any Christian could give a right answer. Come on Trent, at least clear that bar. At least give the right answer first, take a step in that direction. Once this amazing demonstration had happened, then we can talk about explaining it. But not before.
Walter the Gospels are not the oldest books of religions , and you don't have any proof of these miracles walking around done by a man , fiction all it is crap
Doug how on earth am i supposed to fall asleep with this quality of show , its just too good , and funny, ' i prefer face to nose con versation ' had me in stiches , completely woke up , sleep fail
This is a very simple question. If Trent is interested in convincing non-believers that the Catholic Jesus exists and needs to be worshipped as prescribed by normal Christian doctrine, and he has two options he could choose from. Either he can use the standard Aquinas, philosophy, words of the Gospel, Kalam Cosmological blah blah (Id Est, what's currently available). Or he can use a direct FaceTime(FB messenger, MS Teams, Skype) message chat with the actual God Jesus himself (or Yaweh or Holy Spirit)----which would he prefer?
I call the philosophical arguments "red herrings". They are practically a smokescreen to cover up that the belief in it`s foundation is irrational. In a debate that Matt Dilahunty had (I do not remember with whom) the Christian debater said somethin like "philosophical arguments are not the reason for the belief, but that they are used to confirm it". If this is true then it is a waste of time to discuss philosophy with a Christian ... no matter how much you refute the arguments, philosophy is not the real reason for their faith anyway. No one (read: very few) becomes a Christian because of philosophical arguments.
And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.
@28:00 - good point Doug - reminded me of Hitchens - "made broken and commanded to fix yourself". In this case, JESUS made believers gullible and panders to them - he made unbelievers skeptical and is impotent against skepticism, and according to the hell-believers, JESUS will then send unbelievers to hell because JESUS could not fix his own mistake.
What if God came down and did an interview on the evening news in multiple countries, and said he was embracing modern technology to open his Website. You could visit the site and get a virtual tour of Heaven and Hell. You could also check on how your granny is doing. Call me old fashioned but I would be impressed.
Jesus gave us the criteria to determine whether or not Christianity is the truth. John 14:12-13 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father. 13 And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son. According to Jesus, food multiplication, weather manipulation, breaking the laws of physics, healing infirmities/raising the dead verbally should be commonplace among believers. And these are just the basic works that he did. Believers should be capable of doing more than was recorded in the Bible. This is my benchmark for belief. Christianity has been around for 2000 years. Miracles should be mundane at this point. And yet they are not.
@@sanjeevgig8918 but Raymond is correct. If the bible is true as christians claim, then all those miracles should be common place. We should have no need for hospitals as christians would be healing the sick, no need for agriculture as christians would be multiplying food out of thin air, no droughts as christians would he able to manipulate the weather. Everything the bible says they should be able to do. But they cant and make all manner of excuses why they cant. Even god sellers like Trent Horn contradicts his own bible and denouces those miracles his own gods say he should be able to perform. Christians, "by their fruit", are the greatest evidence the bible is a crock of shite.
I'd like to point something out that people have a misconception about. People in the past were not ignorant, superstitious, dullards. They were collectively more ignorant than the humans of 2022, but the humans of 2022 are more ignorant than the humans of 2522. As a fan of archaeology, people in the past were more than capable of being serious and precise. If Information wasn't conveyed precisely and accurately, they couldn't have built Gobekli Tepe, the Pyramids, the ziggaruts, Athens, Rome, etc. I'll give some great examples. The Code of Hammurabi was etched in stone. Those laws are very specific and most of it could serve as a charter today. Another one is the Complaint letter to Ea-Nasir. This is literally detailing a copper purchase gone wrong. You could see that on yelp today. See for yourself. This is specific information conveyed by humans from nearly 4,000 years ago. When people wanted to write serious, accurate things, they were able to without making it look like an epic tale with metaphor, soliloquies, and parallels like religious texts.
Walter sure did run his mouth about being a "teacher" and "naturally gifted" but then couldn't answer simple questions. Funny that, I would have expected him to be more articulate from his opening.
So Trent Horn asks what if there’s a yet unknown natural explanation for miracles. Congratulations, Trent; you’ve solved religions. What if there are natural reasons for “supernatural occurrences” and all the stuff in religions? Or maybe there’s no need for “evidence/explanations”, because it’s all just stories (resurrection, plagues, water-walking, turning water into wine, multiplying bread and fish, etc)
1:29:11 "Well, I know when I'm talking to myself because I rarely do." That's an interesting response! I don't want to psychologize too much, but I wonder if that betrays a lack of self-awareness, self-knowledge, etc.
Ok, Trent. If God, a supernatural being, cannot be described in natural terms, then the following terms, derived from the natural world, cannot be used to discuss God: Person. Cause. Act. Mind. Intellect.Thinking. Motion. Design. Goal. Hear. Speak. Father. Tune. Degree. Morals. Now, I realize that this leaves you without any language to make arguments for God, but that's your problem, isn't it.
[40:00 ish] "How low, how petty, how stupid is your god..." asks PineCreek. The answer seems to be; low, petty and stupid enough to think respect, love and worship by Trent is a necessary precondition of divinity.
14:41 "Well, it's not THE BIBLE that's inerrant- It's MY OPNION of the bible that's inerrant!!!" I like how he goes instantly from complaining about apologists soft-pedalling biblical inerrancy, to HIS OWN soft-pedalling of the inerrancy of the bible.
That apologist around 23:00 sounded familiar to me, if it's Trent Horn as I heard you say it was shitty apologetics his website does that was one of the things that collapsed my faith in Catholicism eventually (mainly their articles on how we could accept evolution but still have to believe in a literal Adam because otherwise Original Sin makes no sense, and if none of those things are real what did Jesus die for then?) so I give him some credit for that. In my case for me to go back first they need to publish some peer-reviewed research (instead of doing some Answers in Genesis style fallacies) that confirms that Original Sin is real and that we all came from a single couple and then we can talk at the very least, yet I know some of them stick to the whole mitochondrial Eve thing as proof of it all. I've been listening to some exMormon podcasts and I found so many parallels with my experience and it was there I was convinced that apologists are willing to defend the indefensible if necessary (such as whether the Book of Mormon is true or if Joseph Smith really did translate the Book of Abraham), that being the case I'll take a look at your videos regarding that.
Without being a history major, I think peace has nothing to do with the spread of christianity. :) "Believe this or you die !!!" . The guy at 1:05 sounds as if people read the bible and out of the sudden are enlightened by Jesus words .... That was probably not true.
To add to pinecreek's “if god cut you off would you know?” experiment, just think of people who beseech the Catholic Saints and Mother Mary to intervene on their behalf. Is Mary really listening? How about ancestor worship. You loved this person but now their gone. Are you really in contact with them or helping them when you do rituals in their name?
I think Doug is setting the bar too low with a miracle a month as proof. I don't see why we couldn't have every church built with a little room, and anyone could walk in there at any time of day or night and meet God. Talk to him, shake his hand, ask questions, take photos. I don't see why god couldn't have a phone number.
Isn´t Trent then also saying that some of the miracles (wine,water,resurrection) in the gospels are magic tricks, or fake? And we should not beleve them for the same reasons of Dougs water napkin or Barkers envelope?
@Pinecreek Two things, one when are we gonna get the Argument of Demonstrated Miracles and two, your talk w/ Ed will be more beneficial than your talk w/ Walter.
The Trent Horn stuff was really interesting. Sure we could do testing under controlled conditions and that would at least prove the miracle itself but if you’re claiming something that cannot ever be proven or disproven by any empirical method, maybe you should take that as evidence that your idea is irrational and that you should stop believing it. Russell’s Teapot.
I think you should modify your last hypo and ask "How would you explain every feeling and experience, everything that has been happening to you ever since you were a Christian?"
In response to PineCreek's good hypothetical (1.42.10) I would suggest it's probably a lot to do with how well the person has accepted their own mortality. Christianity is all about death, it seems to me. In a way that might just seem to have just shifted the explanation back a stage ("but why would one person be more accepting of their mortality?") but if these guys are even partly correct there could well be a link to levels of anxiety, particular aspects of enculturation etc. that could be strong factors. ua-cam.com/video/SS0mwd9cR24/v-deo.html
Walter.. jesus was a Jew and an apocalyptic preacher he wasnt starting a new religion and wasnt planning on dying, he Followed and was baptised by John for Gods forgiveness and the historical jesus was preaching the Jewish teachings nothing new!
Can someone recommend me some apologists who actually make intellectually interesting arguments for a particular religion/god? The "you wont believe in a miracle if you see one today" arguments are such low hanging fruit...
their are catalyst that greatly change things. a miracle dosent just apply itself.... it needs a catalyst. do you know what that is? no? separately, its unfortunate that science is too primitive too figure any of this out. it would change the game.....
So funny the O was just sitting there! Sorry, Doug. My mic wasn't working for some reason. And no not from Pakistan haha That conversation with Walter was amazing! I haven't seen preaching like that in a while. Lol Doug, I wanted to show you Exodus 7:8-13. Isn't it weird that the sorcerers' reaction isn't even mentioned? In the Quran, we have a similar story, but it mentions their reaction. They fell in submission and praised the Lord of Moses. The reason they did that was because the sorcerers were considered to be the best in town when it comes to magic. So what they witnessed, wasn't magic, and they knew the truth of Moses (pbuh) and thus fell in submission and praised God. Yet the Christian narrative, no reaction whatsoever. The story jumps to Pharoah right away. Quite nonsensical. What are your thoughts?
Trent horn has no faith in JESUS. NONE. ZIP. HE KNOWS IN HIS HEART JESUS WILL DO NO MIRACLES. NO. FAITH. He knows in his heart JESUS is impotent. zero faith. NO . FAITH . IN . JESUS . HAS . THAT . MAN.
Can you explain to a colorblind the beauty of the colors? Or can you explain the beauty of music to a death ? No you can't, either you see it and hear it or you don't. The same is the communication with God, either you have it and therefor know that, or you don't have it and can't believe that it's existing. As the colorblind would never believe that there are other colors and would insist that the world is black and white, the same and an unbeliever would never believe in the communication with God. You are a colorblind who wants to convince those who see the colors that they are wrong, but you can be successful only among the same color blinds as you are yourself!!!
@@rageofheaven Your comment proved me right = you ARE a colorblind !!° Do you know what is the colorblindness? This is the inability of people to see the colors, they see the world as the white and black TV, or the white and black movie without the colors. Thise people are not allowed to drive, because they cannot see the difference between the green, yellow or red colors of the traffic light, all colors look the same. But they don't see them themselves to be different, but they think that all other people are different because they are talking nonsense about the colors that don't exist as a such because the colorblind person doesn't see them !! You are a colorblind person who are trying to prove me wrong because i am saying that the colors are existing !!!
@@rageofheaven I didn't asked you about the mechanics of how the colors existing as such but i told you about the people in particular who cannot see them due to their disability and therefor are called colorblinded Do you know that there are colorblind people or you don't? Looks like you don't and trying to prove something that it's not relevant to the colorblindness as a disability.
@@rageofheaven What do you mean "it's not relevant if the person is colorblind or not" ?? The colorblinded person will NEVER get the driver's license for the reason that he does NOT see the colors !!! Do you know that or not ???
@@rageofheaven Do you know or you think that you know ? Do you drive? If you have a driver's license then before you got it they checked you vision condition and there was the test on colorblindness too, they showed you a coloured picture and you had to see a number or a letter from a particular color among other colors !! A colorblinded person CANNOT see it because he does NOT see any color at all !!! Everything is just black and white!!! The old pictures from the past were black and white before the colored pictures were invented, and this is how the color blinded person sees the world around him !!! How you can prove to such person that the colors exist? You can't, he either would believe you or he won't !!!
According to your logic the God has to become your servant in order for you to eccept him as God .If you told him to do a miracle and he disobeyed you and didn't do what you told him to do then there you go , he doesn't deserve your approval to carry on the job of the God 😅
That would mean the christian god is the servant of many in the bible who asked for miracles and physical evidence. If Thomas can command to finger the holes of jesus then why can't we.
Yahweh/Jesus was Elisha's servant ?? 2 Kings 2:23-24 From there Elisha went up to Bethel. As he was walking along the road, some boys came out of the town and jeered at him. “Get out of here, baldy!” they said. “Get out of here, baldy!” He turned around, looked at them and called down a curse on them in the name of the Lord. Then two bears came out of the woods and mauled forty-two of the boys.
@@sanjeevgig8918 No, Elijah was a good servant of God in a good standing that's why he was authorized to use his power of the prophet based on his own decision what to do !!
I was an atheist… but when I read that Gabriel had an open operation on Muhammad’s heart without anesthesia…. I was shocked and looking for evidence …. Ana’s ebn Malik witnessed that he saw the sign of stitches on Muhammad’s chest …. This miracle is known as “split chest” in Islam …. I became Muslim …
“If you use the modern historical method and apply it to the Bible, you’re undermining scripture” summary from Doug. If I thought you were aware of how deceptive this language is, I would call you out for being deceptive. I don’t think you are aware of the difference between what I said, and your summary. At least you have that going for you. Understanding how ancients wrote history and interpreting their words in light of that understanding is not opposed to “the historical method.”
“If you apply modern cultural standards to scripture, then of course you’d be undermining the Bible if you thought Paul was wrong to tell Onesimus to return to his master.” General summary of Christian apologetics.
"Understanding how ancients wrote history and interpreting their words in light of that understanding is not opposed to “the historical method.” By your logic and historical standards, you must accept the Roman emperors like Vespasian were gods and performed miracles and that the Quran is historical and therefore Muhammad is the last prophet and Allah is the one true god. If we apply the same standards to every other theistic claim in history as Christians do to their bible, Christians defeat their own claim that their god is the only god. You played yourself.
@@streetsdisciple0014 christians once again debunking their own claim that their morality is objective by advocating that it is subjective and relative. You won't find a bigger moral relativist and hypocrite than a christian apologist defending moral depravity in the bible like slavery, genocide and subjugation of women.
@Trinity Radio I think Doug got the message across. If you apply the historical method to the Bible it without a doubt undermines your theology. Depending on how you define scripture the way Doug phrased that could have been more clear. I also think you are one of the least genuine apologists on UA-cam so take that for what it's worth.
I don't know if you'll see this 2 days later, but, here goes: your channel kept showing up in my feed. This was my first view. I've saved it to my "favorites" folder. I've always been a needy follower. It took me until age 60 to leave Christianity. I realized I'd believed for bad reasons. But I didn't want to disbelieve for bad reasons, either. I spent my first couple of years as an atheist listening to atheist vs theist debates, & reading a lot of perspectives. I remain an atheist. You made some cogent points here. I'm still learning. Thanks! ❤️
Welcome!
@@PineCreekDoug Wow, you saw this! Good for you, keeping up.
My grandmother died of cancer shortly before I was born, and she was cremated. If a Christian prayed in the name of Jesus that she would be raised from the dead, and my mother and I could watch her ashes reassemble into a human body that looked like my grandma, talked like my grandma, and had memories that only my grandma would have, I'd become the most devout Christian you've ever seen. No, I wouldn't know for 100% absolute fact that Jesus exists or that there isn't some very rare natural cause that can do that. But I'll be damned if my confidence in Jesus wouldn't be at an all-time high.
But according to Trent, that'd be committing the GOTG fallacy. Interesting...
Also, isn't he basically admitting that his philosophical justifications are garbage? If he thinks that accepting legitimate bodily resurrection as evidence that Jesus exists is committing a GOTG fallacy, then why does he think that simple existence is justification of anything supernatural? Existence is commonplace. At least with a resurrection it would be exceptionally rare.
That's what I always said. If I could witness my grandmother coming back from the dead, and then watch her ascend into heaven, that would send my confidence in Jesus right into the stratosphere.
Or if everyone on earth had a Damascus experience like Paul had, there wouldn't be one person who would be doubting god's existence.
It seems like that should be simple enough for an all-powerful god to do, and yet the silence continues.
I gave the same kind of examples before when I was asked what could change my mind (as an atheist who was a christian a few years back).
But now, when I try to imagine this kind of event actually happening to me, I realize that I would think I am crazy (or hallucinating) before thinking of becoming a christian again. That is because of all the other very good arguments against christianity that would be still not answered, and still make christianity extremely hard to accept.
Like if some huge miracle event with a voice shout to me an obvious contradiction like "P and not P". It would be very impressive, but my mind couldn't accept the contradiction.
Trent is not actually using the god of the gaps fallacy correctly. GOTG is about when we don't have an explanation. If someone told you they were going to raise your grandma in the name of Jesus before it actually happened then that would be the explanation, and wouldn't be GOTG. Trent is just talking out of his ass when he brings up GOTG.
GOTG is a specific version of the appeal to ignorance fallacy which is a type of affirming the consequent fallacy, or Post hoc ergo propter hoc. Telling someone you will raise granny, and then raising granny is not affirming the consequent since you told them before it happened.
Great point, Trent basically made it sound like attributing all of Jesus’ miracles to God is committing a GOTG fallacy 😂
Wait just a frickin' minute... what a massive hypocrisy for Trent to poo poo the call for a demonstration of miracles that would possibly change minds about the existence of God. His own church has a process of conferring Sainthood based on the evaluation a person's ability to manifest miracles during and after their life.
While I was still in that church I really did believe in some of the miracle stories, especially when it comes to apparitions attributed to the Virgin Mary such as the ones from Fatima or Lourdes.
However, even back then when it comes to the canonization process I found it strange that not always the church (or the people involved) showed the medical records if there were claims of healing for example, I actually had a similar mentality to his on why perhaps God simply doesn't show himself up to everyone for example as I thought that even then not everyone would accept what he asked of us so that's why faith was needed.
I think Trent is saying 1) Barker says hallucination is more likely than a miracle. 2) Barker says a miracle that he experiences is what it would take to prove god's existence 3) Therefore Barker is engaging in a fallacious statement... clearly he thinks a miracle is not a hallucination when it happens to him. Trent's problem is not acknowledging the public nature of the miracle Barker proposes... many people can witness the number in the envelope on the stage, and the witnesses are not all cult followers predisposed to think the same thing.. many expect it not to happen. Also, presumably Trent is honest, not a huckster trying to trick Barker. Barker may disagree with him, but does not think him a liar. Can Trent say the same?
I wrote exactly that in the live chat.
Guys come on, we all know that’s a category error.🤭😉
“Love your neighbor, be respectful”, worship me. Or I’ll torture you forever! Thanks Walter! Sums up Christianity. I’m not randomly going to love my neighbor without reason. I’ll pass until I know them. Jesus advise sucks.
jesus mentions hell more than any other person in the bible but is held up as the greatest moral person in history
love thy neighbor is also put up by Christians as the greatest thing ever written....and it's crap
@@paulrichards6894 I agree
@@paulrichards6894 And then came Muhammad to surpass him by over twenty times at least. And Muhammad gets almost masochistic about it.
Love me or else!
Walter’s a great example of how Christianity doesn’t just teach believers how to be Christian, it teaches them all sorts of ways to keep convincing themselves it’s true and that nothing else can be, many of which boil down to avoiding simple questions (“it’s not that simple!” “What about Bart Ehrman?” “Muslims are wrong just because!”) and, Dory-like, to just keep preachin’.
_”…Christianity doesn’t just teach believers how to be Christian, it teaches them all sorts of ways to keep convincing themselves it’s true and that nothing else can be…”_
YES!! I think that’s what _”truly born again”_ really means. The Bible’s description of _”born again”_ can’t be observed, nor demonstrated. If we go by what we observe, and what’s repeatable and what’s being demonstrated, what do we see? Christians continually convincing themselves that the irrational things they believe are true. That’s why people like John MacArthur and Mat Chandler say stuff like, _”people walk away from the faith because they were never _*_truly_*_ born again,”_ which really means they started thinking rationally.
@@nuttysquirrel8816 as someone raised Catholic in my case there'd be a bit of gaslighting and then being told that I didn't really understand church doctrine properly or something (I used to look down on some apostates as being simpletons especially if they converted to the megachurches or something similar to those).
Listening and reading stuff from ex-Mormons there's something called a "testimony" and it seems that it's folks trying to show and affirm to themselves and others that they know for sure that the church they believe in really is the Truth.
@@rageofheaven
Good point.
At 29:28, Pine Creek made an interesting and clever remark about first century skeptics. I believe certain Bible verses exist because of those skeptics. According to historians and Bible scholars, before manuscripts were written, Christianity was spread by solely by word of mouth for at least the first thirty-five years after Jesus’ execution. (google Christian oral tradition).
It seems plausible that first century Christians had to encounter skeptics, so counter arguments were developed. Since Christians can’t produce empirical evidence, counter arguments had place the blame of unbelief on skeptics. I believe that’s why there are Bible verses that say _”a sewer went forth to sow, but some seed fell on stony ground,”_ and _”the natural man can not receive the spiritual things of God,”_ and _”the evidence of God’s existence is clear but skeptics are suppressing the truth in unrighteousness,”_ and so on and so forth.
For Walter: No one has the slightest physical evidence to support a historical Jesus; no artifacts, dwelling, works of carpentry, or self-written manuscripts. All claims about Jesus derive from writings of other people. There occurs no contemporary Roman record that shows Pontius Pilate executing a man named Yeshua Ben Yosef (which would have been the name recorded). There occurs not a single contemporary writing that mentions Jesus. All documents about Jesus came well after the life of the alleged Jesus from either: unknown authors, people who had never met an earthly Jesus, or from fraudulent, mythical or allegorical writings.
Just before and during the first century, the Jews had prophesied about an upcoming Messiah based on Jewish scripture. Their beliefs influenced many of their followers. We know that powerful beliefs can create self-fulfilling prophesies, and surely this proved just as true in ancient times. It served as a popular dream expressed in Hebrew Scripture for the promise of an "end-time" with a savior to lead them to the promised land. Indeed, Roman records show executions of several would-be Messiahs, (but not a single record mentions a Jesus). Many ancients believed that there could come a final war against the "Sons of Darkness"-- the Romans.
This then could very well have served as the ignition and flame for the future growth of Christianity. Biblical scholars tell us that the early Christians lived within pagan communities. Jewish scriptural beliefs coupled with the pagan myths of the time give sufficient information about how such a religion could have formed. Many of the Hellenistic and pagan myths parallel so closely to the alleged Jesus that to ignore its similarities means to ignore the mythological beliefs of history. Dozens of similar savior stories propagated the minds of humans long before the alleged life of Jesus. Virtually nothing about Jesus "the Christ" came to the Christians as original or new.
For example, the religion of Zoroaster, founded circa 628-551 B.C.E. in ancient Persia, roused mankind in the need for hating a devil, the belief of a paradise, last judgment and resurrection of the dead. Mithraism, an offshoot of Zoroastrianism influenced early Christianity. The Magi described in the New Testament appears as Zoroastrian priests. Note the word "paradise" came from the Persian pairidaeza.
Osiris, Hercules, Hermes, Prometheus, Perseus, Romulus, and others compare to the Christian myth. According to Patrick Campbell of "The Mythical Jesus", all served as pre-Christian sun gods, yet all allegedly had gods for fathers, virgins for mothers; had their births announced by stars; had tyrants who tried to kill them in their infancy; met violent deaths; rose from the dead; and nearly all got worshiped by "wise men" and had allegedly fasted for forty days.
Even Justin Martyr recognized the analogies between Christianity and Paganism. To the Pagans, he wrote: "When we say that the Word, who is first born of God, was produced without sexual union, and that he, Jesus Christ, our teacher, was crucified and died, and rose again, and ascended into heaven; we propound nothing different from what you believe regarding those whom you esteem sons of Jupiter (Zeus)." [First Apology, ch. xxi]
Wow, thank you for typing all of this out. Excellent comment
Another great show!! Thanks.
Glad you enjoyed it
If Christopher Hitchens is the bad cop then you’re certainly the good cop. Bravo my friend
1:18:22 Doug's channel perfectly summarized-- "Heeey I had this Christian on, and I asked him this question, and he said HAHAA, and he said HOOHOO, and look, you see!? I was right!!"
The most effective method.
Great show Doug. Loved the challenge to Christians inviting them to travel with you on your time machine. Hello from Australia. I agree, let's see more miracles.
Christian Walter made the same arguments that a Muhammadan would make. Yet, Muhammadans will listen to Christian Walter and find his arguments unbelievable. Christian Walter said that Jesus was a special person who changed the world, and that the Bible is the most amazing book. Muhammadans would say that Muhammad was an special person who inspired the creation of a new religion, and that Muhammad's Quran is a miraculous book unlike any other.
I used to work for a casino in Vegas, keeping the working girls out. They charged a lot more than $125 for massages back then.
Lower your standards...no - lower. lower, lower, lower, lower, lower, lower, lower, no still a bit lower, there! Now believe!
i need that bloviation alert in my everyday life. that is a beautiful thing.
I love the way theists refer to their formal indoctrination as an education
At least Trent could correctly state what Dan had written and thus rule out giving a wrong answer. Because none of us think any Christian could give a right answer. Come on Trent, at least clear that bar. At least give the right answer first, take a step in that direction. Once this amazing demonstration had happened, then we can talk about explaining it. But not before.
Walter the Gospels are not the oldest books of religions , and you don't have any proof of these miracles walking around done by a man , fiction all it is crap
Doug how on earth am i supposed to fall asleep with this quality of show , its just too good , and funny, ' i prefer face to nose con versation ' had me in stiches , completely woke up , sleep fail
Born into Catholic home. Has "talent" to believe in god. Because that's how it works and totally not because his parents taught him to believe that.
that walter guy is not playing with a full deck of cards
Bloviation alert. 🚨 deduct 10,000 pinepoints
This is a very simple question. If Trent is interested in convincing non-believers that the Catholic Jesus exists and needs to be worshipped as prescribed by normal Christian doctrine, and he has two options he could choose from. Either he can use the standard Aquinas, philosophy, words of the Gospel, Kalam Cosmological blah blah (Id Est, what's currently available). Or he can use a direct FaceTime(FB messenger, MS Teams, Skype) message chat with the actual God Jesus himself (or Yaweh or Holy Spirit)----which would he prefer?
I call the philosophical arguments "red herrings". They are practically a smokescreen to cover up that the belief in it`s foundation is irrational. In a debate that Matt Dilahunty had (I do not remember with whom) the Christian debater said somethin like "philosophical arguments are not the reason for the belief, but that they are used to confirm it". If this is true then it is a waste of time to discuss philosophy with a Christian ... no matter how much you refute the arguments, philosophy is not the real reason for their faith anyway. No one (read: very few) becomes a Christian because of philosophical arguments.
At least the Reformed Christians with their let em' burn attitude are more consistent.
And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.
@28:00 - good point Doug - reminded me of Hitchens - "made broken and commanded to fix yourself".
In this case, JESUS made believers gullible and panders to them -
he made unbelievers skeptical and is impotent against skepticism, and according to the hell-believers, JESUS will then send unbelievers to hell because JESUS could not fix his own mistake.
What if God came down and did an interview on the evening news in multiple countries, and said he was embracing modern technology to open his Website. You could visit the site and get a virtual tour of Heaven and Hell. You could also check on how your granny is doing. Call me old fashioned but I would be impressed.
Jesus gave us the criteria to determine whether or not Christianity is the truth. John 14:12-13 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father. 13 And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son.
According to Jesus, food multiplication, weather manipulation, breaking the laws of physics, healing infirmities/raising the dead verbally should be commonplace among believers. And these are just the basic works that he did. Believers should be capable of doing more than was recorded in the Bible. This is my benchmark for belief. Christianity has been around for 2000 years. Miracles should be mundane at this point. And yet they are not.
thanks i had know idea i was jebus......
Quoting the fiction from the bible is not the Ninja move you think it is. LOL
@@sanjeevgig8918 but Raymond is correct. If the bible is true as christians claim, then all those miracles should be common place. We should have no need for hospitals as christians would be healing the sick, no need for agriculture as christians would be multiplying food out of thin air, no droughts as christians would he able to manipulate the weather. Everything the bible says they should be able to do.
But they cant and make all manner of excuses why they cant. Even god sellers like Trent Horn contradicts his own bible and denouces those miracles his own gods say he should be able to perform.
Christians, "by their fruit", are the greatest evidence the bible is a crock of shite.
@@sanjeevgig8918 Did you read it all? I thought it was a pretty good ninja move.
@@jaclo3112 Thanks for seeing my point.
I would bet that Walter likes Frank Turek.
I just know that apologists are going to have a field day with Doug’s position about philosophical arguments for God.
They already have. They get very upset with me.
I'd like to point something out that people have a misconception about. People in the past were not ignorant, superstitious, dullards. They were collectively more ignorant than the humans of 2022, but the humans of 2022 are more ignorant than the humans of 2522. As a fan of archaeology, people in the past were more than capable of being serious and precise. If Information wasn't conveyed precisely and accurately, they couldn't have built Gobekli Tepe, the Pyramids, the ziggaruts, Athens, Rome, etc.
I'll give some great examples. The Code of Hammurabi was etched in stone. Those laws are very specific and most of it could serve as a charter today. Another one is the Complaint letter to Ea-Nasir. This is literally detailing a copper purchase gone wrong. You could see that on yelp today. See for yourself.
This is specific information conveyed by humans from nearly 4,000 years ago. When people wanted to write serious, accurate things, they were able to without making it look like an epic tale with metaphor, soliloquies, and parallels like religious texts.
Walter sure did run his mouth about being a "teacher" and "naturally gifted" but then couldn't answer simple questions. Funny that, I would have expected him to be more articulate from his opening.
So Trent Horn asks what if there’s a yet unknown natural explanation for miracles. Congratulations, Trent; you’ve solved religions. What if there are natural reasons for “supernatural occurrences” and all the stuff in religions? Or maybe there’s no need for “evidence/explanations”, because it’s all just stories (resurrection, plagues, water-walking, turning water into wine, multiplying bread and fish, etc)
1:29:11 "Well, I know when I'm talking to myself because I rarely do." That's an interesting response! I don't want to psychologize too much, but I wonder if that betrays a lack of self-awareness, self-knowledge, etc.
Lol at the bloviation alarm 🚨
Ok, Trent. If God, a supernatural being, cannot be described in natural terms, then the following terms, derived from the natural world, cannot be used to discuss God:
Person. Cause. Act. Mind. Intellect.Thinking. Motion. Design. Goal. Hear. Speak. Father. Tune. Degree. Morals.
Now, I realize that this leaves you without any language to make arguments for God, but that's your problem, isn't it.
Is Trent admitting that he couldn't tell the difference between a bona fide miracle and a magic trick?
[40:00 ish] "How low, how petty, how stupid is your god..." asks PineCreek.
The answer seems to be; low, petty and stupid enough to think respect, love and worship by Trent is a necessary precondition of divinity.
14:41 "Well, it's not THE BIBLE that's inerrant- It's MY OPNION of the bible that's inerrant!!!"
I like how he goes instantly from complaining about apologists soft-pedalling biblical inerrancy, to HIS OWN soft-pedalling of the inerrancy of the bible.
That apologist around 23:00 sounded familiar to me, if it's Trent Horn as I heard you say it was shitty apologetics his website does that was one of the things that collapsed my faith in Catholicism eventually (mainly their articles on how we could accept evolution but still have to believe in a literal Adam because otherwise Original Sin makes no sense, and if none of those things are real what did Jesus die for then?) so I give him some credit for that.
In my case for me to go back first they need to publish some peer-reviewed research (instead of doing some Answers in Genesis style fallacies) that confirms that Original Sin is real and that we all came from a single couple and then we can talk at the very least, yet I know some of them stick to the whole mitochondrial Eve thing as proof of it all.
I've been listening to some exMormon podcasts and I found so many parallels with my experience and it was there I was convinced that apologists are willing to defend the indefensible if necessary (such as whether the Book of Mormon is true or if Joseph Smith really did translate the Book of Abraham), that being the case I'll take a look at your videos regarding that.
WALTER should read The Triumph of Christianity, Bart Ehrman
G proves that religion means losing the ability to honestly answer a simple question
"Ha-ha !" 🤣 "Hoo-hoo !" 😆
Without being a history major, I think peace has nothing to do with the spread of christianity. :) "Believe this or you die !!!" . The guy at 1:05 sounds as if people read the bible and out of the sudden are enlightened by Jesus words .... That was probably not true.
To add to pinecreek's “if god cut you off would you know?” experiment, just think of people who beseech the Catholic Saints and Mother Mary to intervene on their behalf. Is Mary really listening? How about ancestor worship. You loved this person but now their gone. Are you really in contact with them or helping them when you do rituals in their name?
I think Doug is setting the bar too low with a miracle a month as proof. I don't see why we couldn't have every church built with a little room, and anyone could walk in there at any time of day or night and meet God. Talk to him, shake his hand, ask questions, take photos. I don't see why god couldn't have a phone number.
Praying to Trent Horn rn.
Pray that Walter doesn't get exposed to the Flat-Earth boys. His style of reason would dovetail into theirs.
"itch it a little, don't leave scars"
my only frustration is that atheists aren't angry enough...
needy people suck too!
Assume that god himself came to you and said: I am the only god who created everything.
How would you know he is telling the truth?
Maybe the disciples wouldn't die for a lie, but would they nigh for a pie? 🤔
Dr. Seuss has reincarnated?
They’d sigh for a guy
@@daheikkinen Ah! In that scenario they would vie for a thigh 😏
Isn´t Trent then also saying that some of the miracles (wine,water,resurrection) in the gospels are magic tricks, or fake?
And we should not beleve them for the same reasons of Dougs water napkin or Barkers envelope?
@Pinecreek Two things, one when are we gonna get the Argument of Demonstrated Miracles and two, your talk w/ Ed will be more beneficial than your talk w/ Walter.
The mind is incredibly malleable.
Trent is Darth Dawkins with grown-up social skills.
The Trent Horn stuff was really interesting. Sure we could do testing under controlled conditions and that would at least prove the miracle itself but if you’re claiming something that cannot ever be proven or disproven by any empirical method, maybe you should take that as evidence that your idea is irrational and that you should stop believing it. Russell’s Teapot.
I think you should modify your last hypo and ask "How would you explain every feeling and experience, everything that has been happening to you ever since you were a Christian?"
You should watch the craig vs parsons debate. Craig got creamed.
At what point does it becomes futile to talk to Walter.
1:54:30 Mario kart people haha
Didn't the Quran change a society?
The Quran didn't, the Muslim armies did
Does Trent accept Creation Ex Nihilo?
Doug, how many Pine Points do I need for a ride in the time machine?
Walter 😱
In response to PineCreek's good hypothetical (1.42.10) I would suggest it's probably a lot to do with how well the person has accepted their own mortality. Christianity is all about death, it seems to me.
In a way that might just seem to have just shifted the explanation back a stage ("but why would one person be more accepting of their mortality?") but if these guys are even partly correct there could well be a link to levels of anxiety, particular aspects of enculturation etc. that could be strong factors. ua-cam.com/video/SS0mwd9cR24/v-deo.html
Ed goes to church to pull women..Ed sounds a great catch
That was Doug's suggestion to Ed like a year or so ago, if I remember correctly.
Ugh, my family has wasted their lives with Christianity nonsense.
They should have kept their receipts for a refund.
Conformation bias is sooo strong in Walter.
Super Walter Bros 1:18:24
Walter.. jesus was a Jew and an apocalyptic preacher he wasnt starting a new religion and wasnt planning on dying, he Followed and was baptised by John for Gods forgiveness and the historical jesus was preaching the Jewish teachings nothing new!
Can someone recommend me some apologists who actually make intellectually interesting arguments for a particular religion/god? The "you wont believe in a miracle if you see one today" arguments are such low hanging fruit...
Novel, testable predictions would be the opposite of god of the gaps. Silly.
When is Pinecreek poker back on UA-cam?????
We've been doing multi-table tournaments lately, so that is difficult to livestream. Did you want to play?
@@PineCreekDoug no I just liked to play it in the background listening to the interesting Chat 🙂👍
Doug, I love how one proof of God for you is necromancy. Seems weird.
their are catalyst that greatly change things. a miracle dosent just apply itself.... it needs a catalyst. do you know what that is? no? separately, its unfortunate that science is too primitive too figure any of this out. it would change the game.....
sorry...a catalyst and 3 requirements that manifest a miracle.
So funny the O was just sitting there! Sorry, Doug. My mic wasn't working for some reason. And no not from Pakistan haha
That conversation with Walter was amazing! I haven't seen preaching like that in a while. Lol
Doug, I wanted to show you Exodus 7:8-13. Isn't it weird that the sorcerers' reaction isn't even mentioned?
In the Quran, we have a similar story, but it mentions their reaction. They fell in submission and praised the Lord of Moses. The reason they did that was because the sorcerers were considered to be the best in town when it comes to magic. So what they witnessed, wasn't magic, and they knew the truth of Moses (pbuh) and thus fell in submission and praised God.
Yet the Christian narrative, no reaction whatsoever. The story jumps to Pharoah right away. Quite nonsensical. What are your thoughts?
I’m pretty sure he’ll be convinced that Islam is true.
@@Applest2oApples Who?
Walter you lost and u did not bring out pinecreeks motive on his channel 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
We know what his channel is about
Trent horn has no faith in JESUS. NONE. ZIP.
HE KNOWS IN HIS HEART JESUS WILL DO NO MIRACLES. NO. FAITH.
He knows in his heart JESUS is impotent. zero faith.
NO . FAITH . IN . JESUS . HAS . THAT . MAN.
Can you explain to a colorblind the beauty of the colors? Or can you explain the beauty of music to a death ? No you can't, either you see it and hear it or you don't. The same is the communication with God, either you have it and therefor know that, or you don't have it and can't believe that it's existing. As the colorblind would never believe that there are other colors and would insist that the world is black and white, the same and an unbeliever would never believe in the communication with God.
You are a colorblind who wants to convince those who see the colors that they are wrong, but you can be successful only among the same color blinds as you are yourself!!!
You should read "The Emperor's New Clothes" LOL
@@rageofheaven Your comment proved me right = you ARE a colorblind !!°
Do you know what is the colorblindness? This is the inability of people to see the colors, they see the world as the white and black TV, or the white and black movie without the colors. Thise people are not allowed to drive, because they cannot see the difference between the green, yellow or red colors of the traffic light, all colors look the same.
But they don't see them themselves to be different, but they think that all other people are different because they are talking nonsense about the colors that don't exist as a such because the colorblind person doesn't see them !!
You are a colorblind person who are trying to prove me wrong because i am saying that the colors are existing !!!
@@rageofheaven I didn't asked you about the mechanics of how the colors existing as such but i told you about the people in particular who cannot see them due to their disability and therefor are called colorblinded
Do you know that there are colorblind people or you don't? Looks like you don't and trying to prove something that it's not relevant to the colorblindness as a disability.
@@rageofheaven What do you mean "it's not relevant if the person is colorblind or not" ?? The colorblinded person will NEVER get the driver's license for the reason that he does NOT see the colors !!! Do you know that or not ???
@@rageofheaven Do you know or you think that you know ? Do you drive? If you have a driver's license then before you got it they checked you vision condition and there was the test on colorblindness too, they showed you a coloured picture and you had to see a number or a letter from a particular color among other colors !! A colorblinded person CANNOT see it because he does NOT see any color at all !!! Everything is just black and white!!!
The old pictures from the past were black and white before the colored pictures were invented, and this is how the color blinded person sees the world around him !!!
How you can prove to such person that the colors exist?
You can't, he either would believe you or he won't !!!
According to your logic the God has to become your servant in order for you to eccept him as God .If you told him to do a miracle and he disobeyed you and didn't do what you told him to do then there you go , he doesn't deserve your approval to carry on the job of the God 😅
That would mean the christian god is the servant of many in the bible who asked for miracles and physical evidence.
If Thomas can command to finger the holes of jesus then why can't we.
Yahweh/Jesus was Elisha's servant ??
2 Kings 2:23-24 From there Elisha went up to Bethel. As he was walking along the road, some boys came out of the town and jeered at him. “Get out of here, baldy!” they said. “Get out of here, baldy!” He turned around, looked at them and called down a curse on them in the name of the Lord. Then two bears came out of the woods and mauled forty-two of the boys.
Jesus was a bottom.
@EMB Servants as how ? What exactly do Christians have to to to serve atheists?
@@sanjeevgig8918 No, Elijah was a good servant of God in a good standing that's why he was authorized to use his power of the prophet based on his own decision what to do !!
I was an atheist… but when I read that Gabriel had an open operation on Muhammad’s heart without anesthesia…. I was shocked and looking for evidence …. Ana’s ebn Malik witnessed that he saw the sign of stitches on Muhammad’s chest …. This miracle is known as “split chest” in Islam …. I became Muslim …
Why do you trust the testimony of Ana’s ebn Malik?
sid...i have some magic beans for sale....if you are interested email me
@sid mogh
🤣🤣🤣
@@Migger_29 this is a hadith known as "mutavater" meaning many people had witnessed and reported. . We as Muslims are truth seekers
@@paulrichards6894 Paul . Is it legal beans or illegal . U look like drug dealer
“If you use the modern historical method and apply it to the Bible, you’re undermining scripture” summary from Doug.
If I thought you were aware of how deceptive this language is, I would call you out for being deceptive. I don’t think you are aware of the difference between what I said, and your summary. At least you have that going for you. Understanding how ancients wrote history and interpreting their words in light of that understanding is not opposed to “the historical method.”
“If you apply modern cultural standards to scripture, then of course you’d be undermining the Bible if you thought Paul was wrong to tell Onesimus to return to his master.”
General summary of Christian apologetics.
"Understanding how ancients wrote history and interpreting their words in light of that understanding is not opposed to “the historical method.”
By your logic and historical standards, you must accept the Roman emperors like Vespasian were gods and performed miracles and that the Quran is historical and therefore Muhammad is the last prophet and Allah is the one true god.
If we apply the same standards to every other theistic claim in history as Christians do to their bible, Christians defeat their own claim that their god is the only god. You played yourself.
@@streetsdisciple0014 christians once again debunking their own claim that their morality is objective by advocating that it is subjective and relative.
You won't find a bigger moral relativist and hypocrite than a christian apologist defending moral depravity in the bible like slavery, genocide and subjugation of women.
@Trinity Radio I think Doug got the message across. If you apply the historical method to the Bible it without a doubt undermines your theology. Depending on how you define scripture the way Doug phrased that could have been more clear.
I also think you are one of the least genuine apologists on UA-cam so take that for what it's worth.
@Trinity Radio why don’t y’all talk to Doug in person?
Amateur atheist criticisms (yawn) and hardcore atheist touchiness (kind of like neediness).
I am very needy 😩
i have a photograph of that bald guy from trinity radio over my fireplace
it does a great job of keeping the kids away from the fire
Really vacuous point. Why don’t you get on with Doug and defend your beliefs instead of your silly criticisms that sound like a junior high student?
Cope