Here is a great summary of audios about answering Atheism that Mariano has compiled and put on his blog. Check it out. Some of them I have listened to and some I have not.
Image by xploitme via FlickrIn the most recent episode Carter Hall aka Hawkman refers to Friedrich Nietzsche, “To him, the true hero was the person who embraced the life that he or she was given and made it better. He called that person ‘ubermensch” to which Lois Lane states, “A Superman.” Yet, along with the concept it is stated that, in essence, we can all be an ubermensch.I like science fiction and fantasy because you can explore themes and ideas that can't be reasonably done in other genres. This is a good example. I think we should be careful in embracing Nietzche's ideas because while he did have some good ones that can be spun positively as it has on Smallville, his philosophy was also an inspiration for the Nazis. Also I don't think Nietzsche thought all people could be ubermensch - only the elite. And when you look at how Nietzsche's ubermensch is described by Nietzche himself do you really wanna be that kind of person? Mariano wrote:
I do not know if they realize that whist to the unlearned in this area this sounds very nice—I can be Superman, after all—to Friedrich Nietzsche the ubermensch were merciless and uncompassionate iron fisted survival of the fittest domineers. Keep in mind that uber is translatable as "super," "above," "over," etc.I most definitely don't want to be that kind of person if that is what an ubermensch is supposed to be.
Some things are hard to explain in a video, but Rhetorical Bullshit gives it a try:
the continual use of terms like "3 people but 1 person" and "3 beings but 1 being" shows this guy does not understand the trinity as defined by theists. if this is a remake of Loftus' argument, and Loftus uses the same language, Loftus doesnt get it either.I agree with him. The problem is that they wrongly equate "person" with "being". They are not the same thing and can't be used interchangeably. Being is "what" and person is "who"? There is one "what" and three "whos". God is one being! The Trinity is the doctrine that three persons make up the one being. Three people cannot equal one person and three beings cannot equal one being. That is truly illogical, but that is not what Christians are saying.
its hard to criticize something you don't understand. however if either does actually understand it, but explains it like this on purpose, then both are just attacking a strawman, and purposefully misrepresenting the trinity in an effort to make Christians appear illogical.
philosophers a great deal smarter than these two, even atheists, recognize the trinity as properly defined, is not illogical.
How on earth can I, or any other thinking adult, accept a dismissal of Epicurus' lethal refutation of the existence of god on the grounds that, well, god really wants to eliminate evil, and he can do it, but he will do it in his own time?
Image via WikipediaNow, he [Christopher Hitchens] considers that “human solidarity” is “in our genes” and “inscribed” because “we wouldn't have gotten this far if we didn't have these qualities.” In other words, this is another it just is of the gaps: it must be because if it were not we would not be here to discuss it. Moreover, it is so because of Darwinian self preservation and reproduction.I totally agree.
What Christopher Hitchens has hit upon is an affirmation of the Bible’s statements about ethics, some of which are:
“I will put my law in their minds and write it on their hearts” (Jeremiah 31:33, reiterated in Hebrews 10:16).
“the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts now accusing” (Romans 2:15).
Thus, “human solidarity” is “in our genes” and “inscribed” but not because of animalistic concerns of self preservation and reproduction but due to humans being an expression of God’s image; God who is relational and loving in nature.
John Loftus have posted this clip from the Bill O'Reilly show where O'Reilly interviews Bill Maher on Religion. Both of them deserve facepalm because of their arguments. IT was like watching a train wreck. I have to give Maher some credit, he understands the Bible better than O'Reilly does although Bill O'Reilly claims to be a Christian. Of course Maher gives with one hand but takes with two. Maher attempted to argue that the Bible was immoral because of the law to kill someone for not resting on Sunday. Although Maher got the day wrong - the Bible says "Sabbath" not Sunday - at least he knew about the law and O'Reilly didn't. It quickly degenerated into a shouting match and to be honest O'Reilly only managed to prove he didn't know what he was talking about. It was an excellent example of Biblical illiteracy - on both sides! I'm afraid that Glen Beck seems to know more about what the Bible actually says than either of these guys. I want to see Bill Maher actually go up against a scholar who knows how to defend Christianity and give answers to the questions Maher asks. One thing that makes Maher successful is that he asks the questions that everyone, who gives any thought to religion, asks but he spins it to make it seem like that there are no answers and only morons believe what the Bible says. Maher seems to find people to talk to who couldn't possibly answer his questions. His movie "Religulous" is all about him tripping up people who have not really given any thought to what they believe and why and may have never been challenged on it. If Bill O'Relly is a Christian and really wants to further the work of Christ he should do one of two things:
When did God create the Candiru parasite? And why didn't he tell us how to avoid it? Seems to me a good God who cared for us would at least tell us, don't you?
To read up on other parasites get the book Parasite Rex. Read it Christian and let it strengthen your faith! Funny thing is that in our ecosystem we need them. But with a God who could perform perpetual miracles we don't need them at all! Which alternative seems most likely?
Oh, and no using the Omniscience Escape Clause.
12 Designate a place outside the camp where you can go to relieve yourself. 13 As part of your equipment have something to dig with, and when you relieve yourself, dig a hole and cover up your excrement. 14 For the LORD your God moves about in your camp to protect you and to deliver your enemies to you. Your camp must be holy, so that he will not see among you anything indecent and turn away from you. - Deuteronomy 23:12-14Now tell me: if we followed this would we have to worry about a parasite swimming into our ureatha? No.
Confessions (Latin: Confessiones) is the name of an autobiographical work, consisting of 13 books, by St. Augustine of Hippo, written between AD 397 and AD 398. Modern English translations of it are sometimes published under the title The Confessions of St. Augustine in order to distinguish the book from other books with similar titles, such as Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s Confessions. (Summary by Wikipedia)I'm looking forward to wading through this material. It was Augustine who prayed when he was young, "Lord, grant me chastity....but not yet."
So, in Genesis 1:1, did an assembly of male gods create the heavens and the earth or did one god create? (If you want to play the Trinity card, then I’ll let your explain the other names of אל + prefixes in the MT text.)What I want to focus on is the point about how the Tetragrammaton (יהוה or YHWH) does not occur in the entire New Testament. McCall is wrong. It does. Recall that the New Testament was written in Greek not Hebrew. Therefore what you want to know is what does the name look like when it is translated into Greek. A great Old Testament text to use to study this point is Exodus 3:14. יהוה is the name by which Moses was to identify God with to the Israelites. It is often pronounced "Yahweh" although we don't know how its really supposed to be announced (but that is another story I don't have time for now). Let's look at Exodus 3:14 in English, Hebrews, and Greek (as it appears in the Septuagint). Please note that Hebrew is read right to left not left to right.
Can you show me why the divine name יהוה does not occur in the entire New Testament? Could it just be that “son of god” fit the Hellenic context of the Greek would while יהוה would have been an abhorrent pagan name for them, especially after the Jews were expelled from Rome in 46 CE?
Secondly, my view is in line with that of Edward Gibbons The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. Weather or nor Gibbons was anti-Christian, his views of the end of the Roman Empire agrees with mine.
Another insider's look at how Christianity really worked in the late Empire is discussed in G.W. Bowersock’s award winning book: Julian the Apostate.
Julian, the grandson of Constantine, gives a horrific story about members of his own Christian family were murders and why he remained a non-Christian ("pagan", a derogatory term
God said to Moses, "I am who I am . This is what you are to say to the Israelites: 'I AM has sent me to you.' "
καὶ εἶπεν ὁ θεὸς πρὸς Μωυσῆν ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ ὤν καὶ εἶπεν οὕτως ἐρεῖς τοῖς υἱοῖς Ισραηλ ὁ ὢν ἀπέσταλκέν με πρὸς ὑμᾶςThe Tetragrammaton comes over to English as "I AM". In Greek it is ἐγώ εἰμι. So now ask yourself..."Does this name appear anywhere in the New Testament? Further who is this name applied to in the New Testament?" Of course ἐγώ εἰμι appears in the New Testament and Jesus applies the divine name to himself that is why the Jews wanted to stone Him. The best indisputable place to see this in John 8:58
"I tell you the truth," Jesus answered, "before Abraham was born, I am!"
εἶπεν αὐτοῖς Ἰησοῦς, Ἀμὴν ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν, πρὶν Ἀβραὰμ γενέσθαι ἐγὼ εἰμί.
ge, geo = earth where we get the word geodesic or geometry
and sus suis swine; hog, pig sow:
So running around and screaming out the name 'Earth Pig' is just not going to cut it folks!
Don't you have a little more respect for someone you claim to worship as God? If you claim that this person has a name above every name surely it would be a name with dignity and respect?
50I declare to you, brothers, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable. 51Listen, I tell you a mystery: We will not all sleep, but we will all be changed— 52in a flash, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed. 53For the perishable must clothe itself with the imperishable, and the mortal with immortality. 54When the perishable has been clothed with the imperishable, and the mortal with immortality, then the saying that is written will come true: "Death has been swallowed up in victory."
55"Where, O death, is your victory?
Where, O death, is your sting?" 56The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law. 57But thanks be to God! He gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.
58Therefore, my dear brothers, stand firm. Let nothing move you. Always give yourselves fully to the work of the Lord, because you know that your labor in the Lord is not in vain.
15He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. 16For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him. 17He is before all things, and in him all things hold together. 18And he is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that in everything he might have the supremacy. 19For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him, 20and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross. Colossians 1:15-20Oh and "firstborn" is referring to Jesus' preeminence. Don't get it twisted.
This sort of fearmongering Sanchez sputtered out is the worst kind. Akin to thinking all black men want to steal your purse, all Mexicans are illegal and all Muslims support al Qaeda. It dehumanizes people (which is why the Nazis said what they said), and once you take away someone's humanity it's all that much easier to take away their life. Also, Sanchez makes the mistake of assuming that just because one is from different circumstances that they are somehow "elitist." I don't know how "elitist" one can be when they're from New Jersey, like Jon Stewart, and made their way through a middling comedy acting career for decades until he finally worked his way up to his own show. But Sanchez bellyaching about not getting a promotion, blaming racism and Jewish people is the height of intellectual laziness. Sometimes you don't advance because you're JUST NOT GOOD AT WHAT YOU DO. Not because "the Jews" are keeping you down.I think that Sanchez dislikes Jon Stewart for the following clips from his show:
Also. CNN is not owned by "da Jews." But Turner Network Television, which was founded by the not Jewish Ted Turner.
Try harder, man. Try harder.
| The Daily Show With Jon Stewart | Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c | |||
| Moment of Zen - Sanchez Taser | ||||
| ||||
