[Google translate] the above Greetings to you, Hani Selim, you are a generous and distinguished person, your content is wonderful, and your guests are also every time I enjoy following you, good luck
The question of faith being a reliable source of epistemology is bankrupt. Faith cannot ground knowledge and knowledge cannot ground faith, similar to the relation between ontology and epistemology. Epistemology concernes the human's access to the world, but we can't understand the human's access to the world if we do not know what the human and the world are; and we can't say what the human and the world are without knowledge of both. So what comes first, epistemology or ontology? One can give an ontological argument for the primacy of ontology over epistemology and one can give an epistemological argument for the primacy of epistemology over ontology. But really the decision one makes with regards to the primacy of ontology or epistemology boils down to a leap of faith. A sort of faith not answerable to the demands of epistemology or ontology. In this sense faith does not ground epistemology but rather instigates the leap from the ground which starts the epistemological movements of intelligence. If intelligence looks back at its founding leap of faith it will not recognize it as a movement of its own because faith is not a function of the intellect; faith is not a function of the will. One cannot will oneself out of faith just as much as one cannot will oneself into faith. Faith is more like an infection or an urge. The only faith which can be lost through knowledge is a faith misplaced in the fist place - a faith within the domain of epistemology. Epistemology placed within the domain of faith leads to similarly bankrupt results.
I love Derek's channel and I listen to it often. I think his guests are the best . But they associate Jesus with things they were taught in the church and then they discuss how the Jesus taught by the church is contradictory. Filled with myths . Changed over the centuries. That does not at all tell us if Jesus was or was not the Messiah . It's a discussion of church myths going around. The Old Testament tells us "Very little "about the Messiah ". It tells us more about the Messianic age to come and what it will be like. So the Church turns to Paul who James already told you was not to be believed or followed.
Some of the things Derek successfully disproves do not prove what he thinks. If he proves Jesus did not rise from the dead " at that time" , he actually makes him "Closer to the Jews views of what the Messiah would do ". So it might be "More likely he was the Messiah , not less" . He is only disproving church teachings on the Messiah , not if he was the Messiah or not . A big difference.
If someone leans NOT on their own understanding and interprets their god's word, I wonder who is doing the understanding. Hundreds of 'true' believers amazingly 'understand' the mind of their god(s) and reach different conclusions. The work of a god of confusion. Here we have a good example where logic is not applied. Susan B Anthony: "I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do because I notice it always coincides with their own desires."
@@joehinojosa8030 You are very kind, but I, like George Washing machine, cannot spin dry a lie because prescience is one of the most accessible parlour games to execute. I predicted, nay verily, I say unto you, I prophesy as it said in scripture Jn 19:28. G.M.T. Mar 21 07:53-2022
All hail Derek and his mighty brain!
Love to watch Derek's, channel. He is so good, brilliant! MythVision, is the BEST. Love his work. Thankyou Derek. 👍👍👍
تحياتي لك هانى سليم انت انسان خلوق ومتميز محتواك رائع وضيوفك ايضا كل مرة استمتع بمتابعتك بالتوفيق 🌷🌷
[Google translate] the above Greetings to you, Hani Selim, you are a generous and distinguished person, your content is wonderful, and your guests are also every time I enjoy following you, good luck
حلقة رائعة كالعادة ومتميزة شكرا لمجهودك هانى سليم استمر بالتوفيق 😂🌷
شكرأ جزيلا يا نونوش
[gargoyle translate ]A wonderful episode as usual and distinguished, thank you for your effort, Hani Selim. Keep it up. Good luck
Great video. Thank you for sharing!
New sub. 😊
Glad you enjoyed it.
Good interview
Cheers mate.
The question of faith being a reliable source of epistemology is bankrupt.
Faith cannot ground knowledge and knowledge cannot ground faith, similar to the relation between ontology and epistemology.
Epistemology concernes the human's access to the world, but we can't understand the human's access to the world if we do not know what the human and the world are; and we can't say what the human and the world are without knowledge of both. So what comes first, epistemology or ontology? One can give an ontological argument for the primacy of ontology over epistemology and one can give an epistemological argument for the primacy of epistemology over ontology. But really the decision one makes with regards to the primacy of ontology or epistemology boils down to a leap of faith. A sort of faith not answerable to the demands of epistemology or ontology. In this sense faith does not ground epistemology but rather instigates the leap from the ground which starts the epistemological movements of intelligence.
If intelligence looks back at its founding leap of faith it will not recognize it as a movement of its own because faith is not a function of the intellect; faith is not a function of the will. One cannot will oneself out of faith just as much as one cannot will oneself into faith. Faith is more like an infection or an urge. The only faith which can be lost through knowledge is a faith misplaced in the fist place - a faith within the domain of epistemology. Epistemology placed within the domain of faith leads to similarly bankrupt results.
I'm in agreement.
I love Derek's channel and I listen to it often. I think his guests are the best . But they associate Jesus with things they were taught in the church and then they discuss how the Jesus taught by the church is contradictory. Filled with myths . Changed over the centuries. That does not at all tell us if Jesus was or was not the Messiah . It's a discussion of church myths going around. The Old Testament tells us "Very little "about the Messiah ". It tells us more about the Messianic age to come and what it will be like. So the Church turns to Paul who James already told you was not to be believed or followed.
Some of the things Derek successfully disproves do not prove what he thinks. If he proves Jesus did not rise from the dead " at that time" , he actually makes him "Closer to the Jews views of what the Messiah would do ".
So it might be "More likely he was the Messiah , not less" . He is only disproving church teachings on the Messiah , not if he was the Messiah or not . A big difference.
Do You have FAITH in Logic?
If someone leans NOT on their own understanding and interprets their god's word, I wonder who is doing the understanding. Hundreds of 'true' believers amazingly 'understand' the mind of their god(s) and reach different conclusions. The work of a god of confusion.
Here we have a good example where logic is not applied.
Susan B Anthony: "I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do because I notice it always coincides with their own desires."
@@VaughanMcCue How INTUITIVE of you
@@joehinojosa8030
Thank you; I had a feeling you would write that.
@@VaughanMcCue You are also prescient.
@@joehinojosa8030
You are very kind, but I, like George Washing machine, cannot spin dry a lie because prescience is one of the most accessible parlour games to execute. I predicted, nay verily, I say unto you, I prophesy as it said in scripture Jn 19:28. G.M.T. Mar 21 07:53-2022
Njj