Sometimes I think creationists should just get ver loud and seek public attention because this stuff has been proved over and over again. Here's Andrew Enelling proving it again too:"
,br>
Seeking God again
7 years ago
Thursday, June 16, 2022
Christopher Hitchens and Alistair McGrath Debate
The debatges between
Another debate betwen an atheist and a Christian. Put it this way: these are debates between tghe flesh and the spirit. Hitchesns whole frame of reference is of course the flesh because he's a fallen unreddeemed man. He has no clue about the regenerated spirit. Christians don't argue consistently fro the spirt of course. But that's something to discuss at some latger time.
]
]
SO mUCH tO sAY aBOUT THE sILLY aTHEISTS tHAT mY hANDICAPS wON'T alLOW
Still wandering in the desert of the atheists at You Tube. Praying for the healing of my eyes and a more reliable computer so I could write something against them with some real clout. That would, or should, take fasting and prayer so it would be in God's will and by His direction. Oh how I'd love to do that.
Here's Christopher Hitchens at his most obnoxious
w
Hard to grasp how obtuse he is in this one when he can be so perspicacious on other subjects such as the rolse of the Roman Church in totalitarian politics. He also said something about modern bible translations I appreciate, I think in a four-way conversation with Dennet, Dawkins, Harris and nhimslef. How they've destroyed the English language. Something that really bugs me too. Not only are they based on bogus gREEK MANUSCRIPTS ABOUT WHICH HE PROBABLY DIDN'T KNOW ANTHING, BUT THEY ARE WRITTEN IN ATROCIOUS eNGLISH.
aNYWAY, i'VE GOT ANOTHER OBNOXIOUS PERSON TO POST HERE: rICHARD dAWKINS DOING A ted TALK:
Here's Christopher Hitchens at his most obnoxious
w
Hard to grasp how obtuse he is in this one when he can be so perspicacious on other subjects such as the rolse of the Roman Church in totalitarian politics. He also said something about modern bible translations I appreciate, I think in a four-way conversation with Dennet, Dawkins, Harris and nhimslef. How they've destroyed the English language. Something that really bugs me too. Not only are they based on bogus gREEK MANUSCRIPTS ABOUT WHICH HE PROBABLY DIDN'T KNOW ANTHING, BUT THEY ARE WRITTEN IN ATROCIOUS eNGLISH.
aNYWAY, i'VE GOT ANOTHER OBNOXIOUS PERSON TO POST HERE: rICHARD dAWKINS DOING A ted TALK:
And H4e Flubbed the Cretion-Evolution Topic as Well.
Still talking about the debate between Peter and Christopher Hitchens mentioned in the previous post. Peter missed the whole point of one man's question about how he regards fossils from his Christian perspective. He made an inept affirmation of Intelligent Design but that's the best he could do.
Perhaps it's becamuse he's an Anglican. they are still way to roman ist.
the correct answer to how we should regard a fossil is to say that we see it as a creature that lived before the Flood and that died in the Flood, that the Flood deposited all those sedimentary olayers that are so ludi crously interpreted as time periods of milli8ons of years.
Perhaps it's becamuse he's an Anglican. they are still way to roman ist.
the correct answer to how we should regard a fossil is to say that we see it as a creature that lived before the Flood and that died in the Flood, that the Flood deposited all those sedimentary olayers that are so ludi crously interpreted as time periods of milli8ons of years.
The Brothers Hitchens Debate. How the Real Locus of evil in the West Keeps Getting Flubbed and Muddied. The Roman Antichreist.
Debate between Christopher Hitchens and his brother Peter Hitchens, Peter representing religion, mostly Christianity, against Christopher's atheism. Again I'm impressed with Christopher's identification of Roman Catholicism in the murderous totalitarian regimes of the twentieth century. tHIS STARTS ABOUT AN HOUR AND A HALF INTO THE DEBATE:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ngjQs_QjSwc
pETER DID A DECENT JOB OF POINTING OUT THE PERSECUTIONS OF CHURCHES IN THESE REGIMES BUT OVERALL i WAS DISAPPOINTED IN HIS RESPONSES. wHAT IS NEEDED IS A GENUINELY pROTESTANT WORLDVIEW AND HIS POSITION IS FAR FROM SHARP. hE TACITLY ACCEPTS rOMAN cATHOLICISM AS cHRISTIANAND DOESN'T CHALLENGE IT AT ALL. cHRISTOPHER IS RIGHT TO POINT TO IT AS COMPLICITG UIN ALL THESE ATROCITIES, BUT THE MISTAKE IS TO EQUATE THAT WITH "RELIGION." rOMAN cATHOLICISM IS THE totalitarian Antichrist agent in the world and has been for over a thousand years. The Reformation gae it a good punch and weakened it, but now Protestantism has lost its perspective and its comibng back. Peter should have challeneged Romanismm from a Protestant point of view and he did not. That leaves the impression that we're talking about "rreligoin" that includes Protestantism. But we're not.
pROTESTANTISM SOUNDS LIKE JUST ANOTHER SECT BUT THE REFORMATION REINSTATED THE TRUE BIBLICAL FOUNDATIONS OF cHRISTIANITY. rOMAN cAATHOLICISM WAS THE USURPER, THE gREAT aPOSTASY, THE REVIVED rOMAN eMPIRE, THE SEAT OF THE aNTICHRIST, WHICH WAS RECOGNIZIED BY THOUSANDS OF cHRISTIANS ALL DURING ITS REIGN IN THE "hOLY rOMAN eMPIRE." tHE rEFORMATION BROUGHT BACK GENUINE cHRISTIANITY. THIS PERSPETIVE HAS BEEN SADLY, TRAGICALLY, LOST
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ngjQs_QjSwc
pETER DID A DECENT JOB OF POINTING OUT THE PERSECUTIONS OF CHURCHES IN THESE REGIMES BUT OVERALL i WAS DISAPPOINTED IN HIS RESPONSES. wHAT IS NEEDED IS A GENUINELY pROTESTANT WORLDVIEW AND HIS POSITION IS FAR FROM SHARP. hE TACITLY ACCEPTS rOMAN cATHOLICISM AS cHRISTIANAND DOESN'T CHALLENGE IT AT ALL. cHRISTOPHER IS RIGHT TO POINT TO IT AS COMPLICITG UIN ALL THESE ATROCITIES, BUT THE MISTAKE IS TO EQUATE THAT WITH "RELIGION." rOMAN cATHOLICISM IS THE totalitarian Antichrist agent in the world and has been for over a thousand years. The Reformation gae it a good punch and weakened it, but now Protestantism has lost its perspective and its comibng back. Peter should have challeneged Romanismm from a Protestant point of view and he did not. That leaves the impression that we're talking about "rreligoin" that includes Protestantism. But we're not.
pROTESTANTISM SOUNDS LIKE JUST ANOTHER SECT BUT THE REFORMATION REINSTATED THE TRUE BIBLICAL FOUNDATIONS OF cHRISTIANITY. rOMAN cAATHOLICISM WAS THE USURPER, THE gREAT aPOSTASY, THE REVIVED rOMAN eMPIRE, THE SEAT OF THE aNTICHRIST, WHICH WAS RECOGNIZIED BY THOUSANDS OF cHRISTIANS ALL DURING ITS REIGN IN THE "hOLY rOMAN eMPIRE." tHE rEFORMATION BROUGHT BACK GENUINE cHRISTIANITY. THIS PERSPETIVE HAS BEEN SADLY, TRAGICALLY, LOST
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
