Excellent insight. I was so excited to see this video because I saw this on your blog. Hopefully you read this comment because you're an inspiration to me. You're a PhD engineer (something I wish I could be but probably don't have the money) and you fully deconverted me from Christianity. Your Philosophical Failures of Christian Apologetics (although kinda harsh) is incredibly detailed and one can tell that you've put a lot of work and effort and you knowledge is vast. And your other ideos like The Problem of Free Will and What is Truth are also classics. I picked up an epistemology book because in one of your meditations you said that's the good thing to start with You've fueled my love for philosophy Anti, and you've been a huge part of my life. Thank you.

And Happy Holidays and New Year!

how can I help you translate this to another language the best way i can? this absolute wonder of a video needs to be translated.

Cool beans are you gonna make your videos on a regular basis or what?

Translating into American English gives another issue. You're translating a dead language into a horrible corruption of a modern one. For example I hope the words colour or honour don't appear in the Bible because Americans can't spell those words.

Certainly closer to that than the Bible

Totally

Spread the word!

It's even in the original rendition. Hasn't been translated once.

@@AntiCitizenX docs.google.com/document/d/1P78h0Md1VnXu6nGiIhzKNHHIh-PiCm1ccsB67CghSag/edit?usp=drivesdk Please have a look this document goes over everything in your video.

Considering that Mormons exist, only the majority will think you are crazy. You can still start a religion with it.

Kind of like how god supposedly used to frequently prove his existence to people with huge public indisputable miracles in biblical times, but suddenly became very shy when cameras were invented and now all modern Christians just have to settle for having faith. It's suspiciously convenient how only ancient dead people got to directly interact with god, but I have to just take the pastor's word for it that God speaks to him in prophetic visions that only he can see and hear. It's pretty unfair if you ask me. Why can't I hang out with Jesus and watch him multiply fish and turn water into wine? It'd sure make it a lot easier to believe in the Christian god.

@@AlteredNova04 I've never discovered a non-masonic pastor, look into it.

@@AlteredNova04 Nowadays miracles are almost exclusively medical, because it's hard to prove to these people that it was the modern medical treatment and not the prayer that healed someone. If you look at the modern sainthood process for the Catholic Church, it's all medical miracles

@@AlteredNova04 if there was video of a miracle , would you believe it?

Amen

So true : ).

If you had a letter to communicate to your children and you had unlimited power .........would you be able to communicate it to them?, would language be a problem if they were old enough to understand speech?

@@sevensickszero6112 Greetings. Would you please clarify your point? I think you are saying that you believe God inspired each of the 40+ authors to write the bible as a love letter to His children and that He then oversaw each of the many translations? I agree that He has unlimited power, but i believe He had a different plan than to create a supposedly perfect bible. There are great parts for sure, but there is too much in that book that slanders God's character for that to be the best He could do in authoring a love letter to His children. I believe the bible is a test of whether people would choose to make it into an idol or whether instead people would seek living relationship with the Living God. The preponderance of individuals within institutionalized religion have failed this test.

@@livinginthespirit407 I have a living relationship with the risen Christ , what parts of the bible make God " look bad"?

​@@sevensickszero6112 Ok thank you for clarifying that you have living relationship with the risen Christ. But this still does not clarify your position as to what you believe about the bible including whether you believe the infinite God insured that it was written infallibly and that it was preserved as infallible through every translation. Do you believe it's possible that an infinitely wise and powerful God could have sought living relationship with His children just as He did with Abraham and without overseeing the authorship of a perfect book and/or overseeing its many translations? Without wanting the religious system to place such a high emphasis on a book and ascribe God-like characteristics to this book? There are a good many atrocities in the bible ascribed against God's character, absurdities, inconsistencies/contradictions, double standards especially against wives and women and other issues. There are sites that list such content. Of course when an individual is committed to believing the bible is infallible and genuinely representative of God's true character regardless of whatever it says... and if that person is committed to defending every verse within the bible no matter what, then this is what that individual will do. A bible apologist will have an answer to everything. I suggest that what is actually going on in such instances is the idolatry of a book and choosing to defend the bible over choosing to defend God Himself against slanderous misrepresentations against His character. Koran apologists do the same with their Koran. I can provide you with specific examples of what i consider to be slanderous misrepresentations against God's character in the religious system's bible, but please first let me know, are you already 100% set upon continuing to believe it is infallible no matter what? As a teaser and nowhere near the worst of the slander against God's character, there is the law against wives that if they commit adultery against their husband they are to be stoned to death. But very interestingly, there is no such law against the husband and he was legally permitted to sleep with whomever he wanted unless it was another man's wife since the other man was protected by "God's" law. You and i will agree that God is the same yesterday, today and forever, so if this double standard against wives was His heart at that time, then this is also his heart today and it will always be so. But is the infinite Living God really the God of double standards against wives? I overwhelmingly believe He is vastly greater than the way He was represented in that bible passage and in hundreds of others.

All thanks to the Ronas.

You are imperfect, therefore you can't comprehend perfection even if it slapped you in the face.

@@tomaszwota1465 then god created us to be imperfect

@@user-rq8xx8ir9t I don't think we got created by any god, unless in some very floaty, foggy "universe as a whole" sense. Also, "perfection" is not as easy of a concept as you could think. Maybe we are part of a perfect universe. How do you know we aren't? What does it even mean? ;)

Wonder if your actually right and worth it anymore to praise such a god overmind puppet master

A list of variations in the King James bible: kjvodebate.wordpress.com/variations-of-kjb/ I am guessing that they probably think it has never been altered.

Im christian and some words have been changed and altered

If an omnipotent, omniscient god really wanted to spread the word, he would create an indestructible, unalterable copy of his book for every person, in that person's language. No copying or translation needed.

Mental gymnastics is religious people's favourite hobby. Much more pleasant than reading books.

The only point there ever is for believing anything is evidence. The level of perfection of the object of your belief is irrelevant to _why_ you believe in it in the first place. Likewise, perfection is a pretty high bar for paying heed to something. A tiger is not perfect by any means, but if there is one nearby, it has my full attention.

@SpaceLordof75, shut up big nose!

@@charlessmith3758 one more time, mate. I'll take you to the fucking cleaners!

@@WorldCupWillie So good, I hope we don't have to go over every line of the movie. I'll bet we can, lol :-)

And I believe he is my father 2 lol

Except were those laws always there or were they passed in response to people doing the exact thing the law forbids? We can never truly know the answer. However, looking at human history and that which is written in the Bible and the talmud, it's most likely the second.

I never claim that it is impossible to translate words with reasonable accuracy. I only ever claimed that absolute perfection is unattainable.

Ancient Hebrew was already a dead language by the time of Jesus, in fact he spoke Aramaic. That means that he himself must have “translated” the law when he talked about it to his followers.

@@pansepot1490 That's not entirely true. Mishnaic hebrew (not biblical hebrew, but still ancient hebrew) was spoken at least a century after Jesus' death. The Bar Kochba documents, for example, are written in hebrew and show clear colloquialisms...

well everyone knows conservapedia is run by god i mean andrew schalfly (i dont know if i spelt it right) literally edited the bible to remove any "liberal claptrap" so if stephen colbert was added to there as a biblical figure then i guess he is one as andrew must be god otherwise he would be a heretic for adding to the bible

@willy welska Ok, my point that this is sounnding like the takedown a Catholic might do of a protestant went way over your head i guess

@@renaissanceman419 Such as the ones I’ve pointed out to you ? Like for example your appeal to age, when you say that Christianity being this old probably means it’s very accurate when we know that religions need not be accurate to survive for a long time, as evidenced by older religions like Hinduism.

@@renaissanceman419 I don’t see the meaningful difference :| And that’s certainly not the rebuttal you gave me when I said that to you in our previous discussion. Edit : « based on things being Lindy » ... I’m not sure to understand what that means, is that an idiom or a typo ?

Why did that deity even create eternal punishment and rules which put people in it...

@Vali Vali or without knowledge and itz our evil and wickedness of rebellion??? If any creator who ever would ever want to bow down or sidmit or praise what sounds like a evil God monster and megatron of a God to respect and endure? Or worth it anymore to go back to or love Dat we need salvation from our savior almighty for existing and knowledge of our control. Megatron is LORD.

where does it say that

@@lilg8915 Revelation22 18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: 19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.

Yup. :)

More like God does not reveal much about the future which is probably a good thing. A close examination of the cleanliness laws imply the source likely new about germ theory.

Flat earthers commonly reference the bible

I agree. Biblical inerrancy is pretty much on the level of Flat earthism and also on the level of the story of deep time evolutionism, both of which are in denial of science.

@@livinginthespirit407 You might want to rethink that last claim about evolution and time. We have so much evidence for that, it's a fundamental aspect of basic biology. Plus the only people who say 'evolutionism' are those who are against reality telling them that their religion is wrong.

​@@MrLightningbob Thank you for your response Mr. Bob. The real evidence is for adaptation and variation which is observable, repeatable and predictable. By contrast, the real evidence does not support the stories of single celled organisms supposedly evolving over millions of years to form 100,000 different types of information specific origami like folding proteins, 20,000 different types of exorbitantly sophisticated molecular machines, factories, transportation networks, etc within the cell, DNA information, instructions and blueprints, dna editing and repair machinery, organs and their accompanying inter-dependent systems, every major body plan, etc. Please be aware of those who would say to you that intelligent design model denies adaptation and variation since this is just a caricature misrepresentation. ID model espouses that intelligently designed organisms are capable of varying and adapting to their environment in predictable ways. Dog breeding is an example as are finch beaks and antibiotic resistant bacteria. The vast preponderance of the mountains of peer reviewed evidence for "evolution" is fully in line with the intelligent design position. The merging apart is not in a belief that various types of mammals don't vary, it's in the belief of how mammals arose in the first place and what the evidence actually demonstrates the most plausible cause without eliminating one of the two major possibilities a priori. This is where "evolutionism" comes into the picture since it pushes its agenda forward with a lot of just so stories accompanied by drawings. I refer to it as "evolutionism" since it is a belief system based in the presuppositional bias that life could not possibly have been intelligently designed, therefore it must have arisen purely through materialistic and/or naturalistic processes. No amount of exorbitant and extraordinary evidence for Intelligent design (as i had listed above) can shake the believer in evolutionism from their belief, in large part since the intelligent design explanation is disallowed a priori. Theists have a choice to believe either their God designed life in many forms or a mindless materialistic and/or naturalistic force designed the many forms of life starting with single celled organisms . Myself, i was once an evolution believer since that's what i was indoctrinated to believe all throughout my school and university years. I remained an evolution believer for many years as a theist until i actually explored what at the time i considered to be the ridiculous position for "creation" and/or intelligent design. I don't believe in an infallible bible, so i have no need even today to believe the bible got it right where creation (or at least intelligent design is concerned). Thus i am free to go wherever the evidence leads. Atheists on the other hand have no choice, so they tend to become very fervent in their belief in deep time evolutionism. They also tend to conflate the completely non controversial observable and repeatable evidence which is fully a part of both "Theory of Evolution" and the intelligent design model (dog breeding, antibiotic resistant bacteria, finch beak variation, etc) and convince themselves that all of this observable evidence is indisputable evidence for never once observed deep time evolutionism where correlation is assumed to be causation, similarities are assumed to be evidence of ancestry, etc. Nested heirarchy is widely pronounced as phenomelal evidence for "common descent evolution of all life from single celled organisms", but a nested heircharchy for life forms existed long before Darwin and it was established by Linnaeus who was a creationist. Nested heirarchy has also been done with vehicles, electronics, grocery items, etc. Only if one asserts a priori that intelligent design is not possible can one then conclude that nested heirarchy is amazing evidence for deep time evolution... and forming an a priori assertion for naturalism and against any possibility for intelligent design is indeed what the mainstream scientific community has done. An example of what the evidence actually demonstrates is Lenski's study where 70,000 generations of bacteria adapted and varied based upon environmental stimulus, while fully remaining single celled bacteria. Dogs with aggressive intelligent selection often compared to millions of years of what nature without intelligence could have accomplished and they are all still dogs... and less sturdy and less healthy dogs at that.

@@livinginthespirit407 There is so much that is just wrong in your answer that a book could and have been written to refute essentially every claim you made here. I did have a longer answer written up but it was lost. And no, just because a nested heiarchy can be utilized for just about anything does not imply intelligent design. Simply the recognition that someone can recognized the similarities. I also recognize that your examples are all things that cannot reproduce- a sure sign that you are an ID proponent who thinks that is a win when it shows your filacious thinking. I am not a biology student or expert, simply someone with an interest in science. However I would be interested in watching you take this debate to people like Aron Ra and Jackson Wheat, maybe Gutsick Gibbon (Erika) would take you up.

That exact thought occurred to me too. So I left deliberately left it as “men” just to subtly emphasize the point. :)

I like it!

@willy welska Sorry to burst your bubble, I was a christian so that's why I have an interest in the stubject.

Yeah. The omnipotent god creator of the universe, originator of all life on earth can’t write a book. He needs men to write it for him. Just think about it. GOD CANNOT WRITE A BOOK. Can build a universe out of nothing but needs help to write a book. Let that sink in.

Do you have sources on that I can look over?

left-handed....sounds sinister to me

The evidence is not just limited to atheists to find them.

Paul met with disciples including Peter and James (Jesus’s very brother) they affirmed what he taught and he even asked specifically to make sure he wasn’t misleading people. Fully God and Fully man simply means Jesus wasn’t faking being human, and that he never ceases to be God. God knows that humans face suffering in life, but he doesn’t know how that feels, by incarnating as a human God got to see what it’s like to actually suffer. So in short fully God and fully man simply means Jesus wasn’t some demigod.

Many Christians become an atheists because the bible itself is confusing. They took the easy way out & become an atheist without studying other religions. Indeed, God is real

@Maximal's Personal Profile I dont believe atheism exist. They believe in god but they just dont want to obey. They just keep lying to themselves to the point where they think god doesnt exist but in reality they just dont want god to exist. Everytime gods mentioned they get annoyed. They can believe everything else is created(phones, cars, planes, buildings, machines, computers etc), except living things & the universe they live in. They believe they had ancestors without seeing but not a creator. Even richard dawkins one of the biggest atheist said "oh god" by accident. Dont give me that excuse that its just a phrase he use to saying. I use to swear with foul words but i stopped because l didnt like it. If you atheist really didnt believe in god, it would be easy to stop saying "oh god". Phrases like that dont slip out randomly. I dont believe jesus is god, so its easy for me to not say it. Its always a personal issue why they dont believe god doesnt exist, like "Why did god let all these people die". So in conclusion atheist are just confused, arrogant, ignorant individuals.

@Maximal's Personal Profile The true religion must have these characteristics: 1. Must be Monotheistic. = It must be monotheistic because we must acknowledge that there is only one God. I do not want to go into the argument of the existence of a supreme being because I am sure everyone has read the arguments out there so it would be useless to restate them. Now assuming you believe in a supreme being or beings, your religion must be monotheistic. 2. Must be open to all people to convert. = This is pretty much self-explanatory. If God is All-Caring and All-Just he cannot simply make His religion closed to specific people because that would be unjust. He provides everyone the opportunity to seek Him, regardless of their race, gender & language. 3. Must have source of unchanged revelation from God. = The true religion of God, must have a divine book that all mankind can refer to, if they were to need His guidance. God must communicate with his subjects in order for us to know the way. Therefore logically there must be a sort of revelation that was revealed by a prophet. 4. Must be brought by a true messenger of God. = Someone can say, why do we need a messenger from God when He can just speak to us directly? The answer is simple, God’s revelation requires a superior capacity of heart that only a few have attained. God’s message is so immaculate that it cannot simply be understood by the average Joe. Imagine a child from preschool, goes and attends a conference full of professors, will they understand anything? If not just be more confused? A person who lacks the huge capacity of heart cannot hope to receive direct revelation from God, because he would simply become crazy.

@@ZackKcaz why yes, an athiest using the term "oh god" is definitely evidence for your claim. What a strong argument that has been rigorously tested, researched, and scrutinized over by thousands of reputable minds like they do in the world of science. Truly deplorable human beings we are for using science to come to our conclusions,

@@TheFattestLInHistory Athiests are the most ridiculous utter fools in all of creation. It’s like an iPhone denying the existence of Steve Jobs. Lol

Leslie Viljoen More than likely, the man whom the people at that time knew as "jesus christ" was a level 4 grand wizard alien from the 5th dimension. That explains his superpowers.

Strictly speaking, logical positivism was more of a movement than a collection of specific doctrines. That means it is kind of hard to qualify as a true positivist, given that everyone in the original movement is now dead. There are, however, many ideas that developed from the positivist circles that are alive and well in science today. Namely, the analytic-synthetic distinction and the verifiability criterion of meaning. I definitely sympathize with these concepts, and I give many practical examples throughout my videos. Incidentally, one of the fastest ways to identify a complete philosophical hack is to ask them their opinions about positivism. If they tell you that positivism is dead and that everything they ever promoted is now discredited, then you know you are talking to a pseudo-intellectual buffoon. Most philosophers today are actually highly sympathetic to positivist ideas, and those ideas are very much embedded in modern science. That’s why I get annoyed when people use “positivism” as some kind of dirty word.

@@AntiCitizenX ah I see, thanks for clarification

It's very unlikely that any single argument will change anyone's mind, especially over night, but a bunch if well researched and logical arguments together could, over time, easily convince people

@@Deathnotefan97 look what happened to the USA. One mans sound arguments, shared and repeated over a few centuries by the right people, in the right time and place spawned a republic which has put people on the moon from a group or religious zealots in wooden ships escaping persecution and economic hardship. A man who thought there had to be a better way. Do not doubt the power of reason, logic and the value of appealing to the hearts of regular people. You can still change the world.

i found it to be the opiate of the people myself

There’s some new stuff in the works. Be patient. :) Honestly, the word “reason” has no official definition, despite what ivory tower academics would have you believe. That’s why a big chunk of this channel is devoted to piecing it all back together. Watch “The Language of Logic,” followed by “What is Truth.” Some textbooks on mathematical logic and proof theory will also help out.

@willy welska Do you mean the book of Mormon?

😎👍 agreed

Also this video is essentially Aron Ra's Foundational Falsehoods, part 2, specifically the ending. Good series. Got the book for Christmas.

@@patnewbie2177 Everything that begins to age has a cause. WLC began to age. Therefore, WLC began to age.

@@TheBastius everything that exists has a time WLC begins to age Therefore he has a time

@@patnewbie2177 I just looked it up: He's 71.

@@TheBastius Wow, he's old. Thanks for googling it for my lazy ass! Also this will sound weird, but I think he would have made a good narrator or voice actor if he didn't choose defending dogma as his career.

And the Mormons would tell you that the keys and the power went away with the councils around the 4th Century AD as the church became apostates. Not returned unto earth till a man in upstate New York was visited by an angel and by God & his son (not the same person) ... Point being extraordinary claims need extraordinary proof. These books are bad fiction. Self contradictory, full of revisionist history. Like how many people know there are 2 versions of Genessis? Before and after the adootion of monotheism from the polytheism of the Babyllonian gods? Or the origin of JHVH as the war god of the pantheon and a mountain tribes sky god before that? And probably yet another tribes devil at the same time.