Test of Sincerity

anthonykim021272:

HI, I stumbled upon your video somehow and I would like to ask you some questions,  Continue reading

Advertisements

Premature Judgement

fawlty35:

I haven’t logged into this youtube account in over 3 years.

The Bible is full of allegorical tales from earlier cultures. It doesn’t take a linguistics ‘Professor’ to know this. It seems that the ‘Professor’ feels like he has found some truth that only the “academic few” are aware of. This is not the case.

For you, the Bible and God are one in the same. Both you and the ‘Professor’ believed at one time that something written by Man is the ‘Word of God’.

When this no longer appears to be true, you discount God entirely as did the ‘Professor’. Try reading Bernard Haisch for a different perspective. You seem to have committed to a one track analysis of God’s existence, largely led by someone who may be looking for answers himself (reason he was reading the amazon reviews in the first place). Continue reading

You can’t define atheism as a “lack of belief”

todocambiara2:

Something cannot be what it is not. Nothing is defined by what it is not. When you say, “Atheism is the lack of a belief,” you’ve done it, right there.

Atheism is (atheism being something) the lack of a belief (the lack of anything is nothing). You’re right in saying that atheism lacks belief, but not about what atheism is, only what it lacks. I you use the definition “the lack of”, you’re saying something is what it is not. Continue reading

Fallacious Use of Occam’s Razor?

alan1507:

Hi, I PMd you earlier but then saw your guidelines for a provocative title and to keep it short, so heres a repost!

I enjoyed your videos and appreciate the gentleness and respect with which it was done. I have a similar background to you (PhD in Adaptive and Neural Computation). Im a Christian; I’m not here to preach, but would take issue with you respectfully over your use of Occams razor to eliminate God. I think this is a fallacy.

Continue reading

Your Denomination Had It All Wrong

kotpa01:

The reason why I asked you what Christianity/Gospel were is because of the content of your videos. Each of your videos is riddled with logically fallacies and vain deceptions. Some of the fallacies found were; straw man arguments, equivocation, reification, bifurcation, question-begging epithets, faulty appeal to authority, irrelevant thesis, and so on Im afraid your Christian experience was based on a faulty and very subjective gospel, a false gospel which only produces false conversions. Chris, you defaulted to me to share with you what I think Christianity and the gospel are. So I thought since you and your 7K followers like videos, I have attached three short videos from Paul Washer that represents biblical Christianity/gospel. Please watch… Thank you, Paul


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9A09uf03Yps 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OAS81NIg8Vw&feature=related 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J8VqbT17Owc&feature=related Continue reading

Religious Experiences as Evidence for God

GoforBroke4:

“Show me evidence for God, please, GoForBroke, and I will gladly believe in him. “

Hmmm, okay, so if God is by defintion supernatural, why do you only accept scientific or naturalistic evidence of God?

Or are you willing to accept other forms of evidence/logic?

If so, there’s a philosophy major I am subscribed to called Telemantros, who may be able to give you the logic/evidence you’re looking for. I really do suggest you take a look at his videos: starting with “Religious Experiences: Introduction (Part 1 of 5)” The whole series is about 10 videos long, and explains a LOT better why religious experience should be counted as reliable form of evidence a lot better than any of my videos. (please disregard his videos where he ventures into abiogenesis and evolution because it’s obvious that’s not his are of expertise) Continue reading