This person lost credibility at 1:40 in the first video. Nothing to see here except the usual new atheist pablum.
Christians think about this.... if you dare
by AK - Jeff 30 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
leavingwt
Why? Is that all it would take to make a believer out of you? Forgive me for my "skepticism".
You're probably right. One talking donkey might not do it. It would definitely arouse my interest.
-
AK - Jeff
One must wonder what 'the new atheist pablum' is, mustn't one?
Still, it probably more nutritious than the 'new Christian pablum' which consists of a large circle repeating " I believe the Bible because the Bible says it is true, therefore I believe the Bible."
Jeff
-
tec
I listened to these yesterday; just didn't have much time to respond. While I don't know what 'new atheist pablum' is, I have heard the arguments presented by the guy in the first three videos - mostly all from this site :) And I do think he should be directing toward fundamentalists - but I'll respond to a couple things.
First, you can't use the OT to override the NT. Not if you're a Christian, though there are many Christians who do the same, and my response is the same to them. So the mercy that Jesus taught (and actually, in this case, he quoted from Hosea 6:6) is that God requires mercy, not sacrifice. (NIV) Jesus also taught not to judge, to bless and not to curse, to love God, neighbor, enemy...
Following Christ (as Christians should) puts an end to the whole 'stoning' a woman found not to be a virgin, as well as many other things.
The OT has its uses, and can help us to understand the things the apostles and Jesus spoke about, but Christians follow the teachings and example of Jesus. Period.
Second, regarding 'God could have provided relevant info through Jesus (DNA, physics, etc) that no person back then would have known without his help - to prove things to us now.' That's all fine and good for us, but it would have meant absolutely nothing to the people then. They would have had no capability of understanding, verifying, or even writing things like that down.
(of course, some of the miracles Jesus performed could be things we haven't yet discovered how to replicate - just a thought)
Also, he made a statement about 'we could all be living in the matrix, as far as anyone knows.' I don't know. This just struck me as funny. He seems to be dismissing the fact that faith in God/gods/creator/spirits has been around for about as long as we know that we've been around. I find that, in itself, strong and compelling evidence for the existence of something supernatural. So belief in a creator (in whatever form that takes) is not a new claim that needs to be proven. Atheism is the new kid on the block.
So I didn't agree with much of what he said, though he does ask valid and thought-provoking questions. I've just heard and responded to them before.
Tammy
-
garyneal
As I promised, I looked over the first video and want to offer some comments.
I'll just keep it to the last point where he stated that our knowledge of today exceeds the knowledge of the first century writers, well all I have to say is duh.
I've always wonder how the Bible would read if it were written by modern man. We perceive things so differently that I believe that the way the Bible was written shows that what the Bible writers did not know about their world can fill volumes of books on a book shelf. It's a shame that the woman who's son had mental issues decided to try exorcism first before seeking qualified counseling.
The one redeeming quality of the Bible is Christ's example of love and his simple commandments to love one another.
-
garyneal
Now the second video I must say actually resonated with me. We see real bad examples of this here not only on just the Bible or the Koran, but also on teachings of men eminated from the WTS.
I think it is one thing when a person is willing to put his life on the line for his faith and convictions. It is another to go and take another life because they do not agree with one's faith and convictions. I personally believe religion is divisive in this sense and it makes me question whether or not fundamentalist christians are any better than militant islams.
-
garyneal
The third video does present a very big dilema for people who discover that either the Koran or the Bible are true. Which one?
Heaven forbid that it is Koran for it would require that I study yet another book and learn yet another Gospel.
But truth be told, he is right and that most people do choose their religion based on what part of the world he or she was born.
-
designs
Gary-
Grasshopper you are very wise........
If humanity and particularly western civilization had simply followed the Golden Rule we likely would be far advanced in the humanities at least, although science as applied to military endeavors seems to mother quite a few innovations. Catapults and cannons would probably never have been invented by peace loving Mennonite types. What was it in WWI, cannons for the first time could shoot far enough that the rotation of the earth had to be calculated in- Germany to Paris I believe. Things that are difficult to reconcile.
We've simply come a long way from the time when our ancestors thought God was Thunder.
-
Mysterious
Here's a thought. If we are going to talk about the 'science of archaeology' can we all at least provide a reference to our facts. This I am directing at both sides. There is no point in having a debate if you are going to "watchtower out" ie. 'studies show' ad nauseum.
BurnTheShips - People believe many irrelevant things. (Like the misguided concept that putting butter on a burn is somehow a good idea) Just because it is not relevant doesn't mean it doesn't need to be debunked.
leavingwt - Why is faith sufficient? You don't explain your willingness to dismiss evidence at all in your post. Would you trust a doctor that told you if you painted your toe blue it would fix your broken leg? What if he told he REALLY believed it would work? What if there was a study on painting toes blue that showed no effect on broken legs?
-
XJW4EVR
One must wonder what 'the new atheist pablum' is, mustn't one?
Why should I educate you? The new atheism is nothng more than warmed over 19th century rationalism, that was thoroughly refuted then, and will be once again. As Hegel said, "The only thing we learn from history is that we learn nothing from history."
Still, it probably more nutritious than the 'new Christian pablum' which consists of a large circle repeating " I believe the Bible because the Bible says it is true, therefore I believe the Bible."
And you new atheists do not have the same circular reasoning? I do not believe the Bible because the Bible cannot be true? Your presupposition does the exact same thing you say the Christian's does!