If I accepted evolution as fact, for the sake of your idiotic argument, that very acceptance does not necessitate a rejection of an "Adam" and "Eve". In fact this meme recalled to memory a documentary I heard of years ago and it is conveniently on Youtube. Try again Pastor Athiest.
This article linked above was just posted in the Google+ Atheism group I joined up with to see what kind of silly memes and posts these guys post. This was one of them. It's a bit annoying to me that they think this might be some kind of evidence that God doesn't exist. Christians of all stripes lose their faith all the time (but many atheists come to faith all the time as well). Pastors and priests lose their faith all the time (but also many atheists become Christians and become leaders as well). All these cases neither prove God exists nor disprove him. All it proves is that it is part of the human experience to seek out an ideal which satisfies their need to answer their life's questions. I being a Catholic only have this to say about this man, he wasn't Catholic and so wasn't in the original form of Christianity anyway, and furthermore, he leaving Adventism and belief could only prove (if he remains that way til death) that he wasn't predestined for salvation. I'd advise praying for him but he also has free will and if he is not willing he will not budge. God will use Mr. Bell in one way or another, for his glory.
Above you will find an amazing apology from one of the "hosts" of Prophetcast, an atheist show on Atheist Analysis. "A little" heated is a bit of an understatement. In the last 10-15 minutes or so, he was speechless, befuddled, and could barely string a sentence together, until he basically cut the program short because he about had it. What could possibly get him to react this way? A simple correction and attention to detail. I was expecting these guys would be interested in truth and science and the like. But apparently that all goes by the wayside when they are called out on their erroneous understanding of terms that they use. Everyone makes mistakes, but they continued to resist and reject correction and gave up. How can anyone accept such a spectacle? The arrogance astounds me.
Streamed live on Dec 14, 2014Prophetcast strives to bring an open forum to discuss religion, atheism, secular humanism and the politics and current events surrounding them. Having regular guests join the show and constant new ones, Prophetcast is always open to new ideas for topics and invites anyone as future guests!
What happened was these guys were responding to news that a Protestant pastor stated that he thinks gays should be stoned to death and are all pedophiles. Instead of refuting such an obviously false statement, they instead used it as an opportunity to attack the Catholic Church by saying that when they think of pedophiles they think of Catholic priests. That's when I commented on the Atheist Analysis chat that they should read the 2004 John Jay College of Criminal Justice (CUNY) study on the abuse crisis in the Catholic Church (read it here) from 1950-2002.
The greatest percentage of cases were cases of post-pubescent boys being abused.
Pedophilia is perpetration towards pre-pubescent children, not post-pubescent children. (Source: Forensic Psychology, p. 127) As such, they could not refer to the crisis as simply a "pedophilia scandal". When corrected, the hosts clearly could not understand, either by admission or perhaps intellectual capacity, that there is a difference.
Pedophilia is an issue of power and dominance and so does not have a preference between boys or girls.
Victimization for pedophiles has more to do with availability and access to victims, in which case was mostly boys (altar boys, all boy schools).
So what do we call it when victimization involves post-pubescent boys (majority of cases). I made the simple parallel. What would you call an adult male who victimizes a post-pubescent and yet under the age of consent female? You can say it is "predatory heterosexual behavior". Who could argue with that description?
Replace the female with a post-pubescent male and what behavior is that? You can say it is "predatory homosexual behavior", which is exactly what I called it in the chat.
Now these hosts, instead of calmly assimilating the data, decided to mock it, oppose it, and engage in the most amount of logical fallacies in the shortest amount of time that I've heard in a while. C'mon guys...
I think for this reason alone that these guys have no business doing a show like this. As I suspected, their show description is a sham, and the only real "bigots" are these two idiots. Did I show hate at all for any group? Not at all. If anyone, these two did against believers and Catholics.
big·ot
noun\ˈbi-gət\
: a person who strongly and unfairly dislikes other people, ideas, etc. : a bigoted person; especially : a person who hates or refuses to accept the members of a particular group (such as a racial or religious group)
This week Joseph and Chris will dive into the physical and mental once again. Trauma and its many variations, the danger of its short and long term implication, signs to look for, and much much more will be covered. Brain chemistry changes, personality shifts, amazing survival stories, and of course some dry nerd humor because Chris simply cannot resist the temptation sometimes...
This is the newest series to be premiering on the Atheist Analysis Network and will be concentrating on psychological phenomena and their many biological implications, new or cutting edge scientific developments, and the political consequences of new scientific, psychological, and engineering discoveries. Joseph brings years of expertise as a practicing psychology major and former devotee of the church of Jesus Christ and the Latter Day Saints while Chris is a Mechanical Engineering entrepreneur and life long non believer.
Response
Find a real expert, either having academic credentials or functional expertise in the field.
God: aliquid, quo nihil majus cogitari posit (that than which nothing greater can be conceived). I'm not a proponent of the ontological argument btw. It's a simple definition, however.
An atheist acting morally, even morally congruous to Christian principles doesn't mean God does not exist. Atheists can have moral values, I think the real issue is what obligation does one have to act morally? On what basis can those with power in society dictate what those without power can and cannot do? On what basis can you even evaluate that? I'm not sure if social contract is good enough, in the absence of pre-existing Judeo-Christian moral principles.
Tattoos? Foundation by which we will teach.... Sounds like a religion is forming... to hearken back to the John Moesman interview.
So, the show seems to be a sham. LOL. They invite Q and A, but havent addressed any of my comments.
A bit off the atheism topic. But I've been sharing some of my views as of late regarding the fallacies of our two party political system. I've been watching some videos lately regarding Bill Cosby. Say or believe what you will about his scandal, he has excellent points about what I would call the entitlement attitudes of recent generations. I hope this video gets shared far and wide.
1) Complexity implies a designer. 2) The universe is highly complex. 3) Therefore, the universe has a Designer. 4) God is a Being who is able to design a universe. 5) Therefore, God does exist.
