17. With Greg Koukl - Intolerance

[@ProTheist]

I like Koukl. He remains calm and is quite good in discussions. It would be cool to see him do more videos.

[@orangesfromlondon]

Greg Koukl has been my favorite guest so far. None of the other's have said anything I can relate to.

[@kvelez]

0:50 Great insight. 1:38 Amen to that.

[@randyjsing]

Brilliant.

[@4thcoming]

Great video!

[@4thcoming]

@OutOfTheBoxThinker His answer was short and truthful, "I haven't really read any books on the topic. I read a few essay's." In a way, I was not surprised by his answer, but I was still shocked. "How unscholarly" I thought to myself, "for a college president to write a vehement, wholesale denunciation of ID without having done any serious homework on the topic." -Thomas Woodward in Darwin Strikes Back.

[@MrvlZmb]

We usually try to draw the line at doing harm to others, or to the integrity of vital institutions like the economy or national defense. Oppressive states usually are considered oppressive because they limit freedoms for purely ideological reasons. So for example, keeping murder illegal is rational, because it protects the well-being of all. But restricting marriage to heterosexuals is irrationally prohibitive, because it does nothing for society, only serving the interests of ideologues.

[@Mathenaut]

@ChristianApologics Problem is, it's true.

[@JesusCannotFail]

@Mathenaut An example would be helpful--an experience you have had in which Christians attempted to actively suppress your belief system.

[@Tahquitz]

Hey, great guest...the music ( with warbling syth patch) needs to go down at least 20db...it's in the way...sorry...Thanks..,.Greg's one of my fave teachers.

[@MrvlZmb]

Where do you see any indication that I discriminate against Christians? The last question is not at all off-topic. I cited discrimination against gays as evidence of Christianity's intolerance, which is related directly to the point I made in my very first post. If you are defending Christianity, then you need to commit to a position on gay rights.

[@beelever7464]

"They have no respect for others..." "They?" It is good to see that you don't stereotype. There are some Christians who do not respect other people or their beliefs. There are a lot of atheists who are exactly the same way. I certainly wouldn't lump all atheists together and say "they" are aggressive, disrespectful, etc.

[@nad77772]

I think all these arguments consist of people trying to convince people not willing to be convinced, it's going no where

[@4thcoming]

@OutOfTheBoxThinker I go to a secular college. Also may Universities were founded by Christians and bases on Christian principles. "How many books on our side - the ID side - have you read?" I asked, adding, "I would assume, of course, that you've read Darwin's Black Box, Our most important book?" cont...

[@MrvlZmb]

"They think I'm intolerant because I think I'm right." Straw man. Christianity is often called intolerant because it seeks to actively prohibit another's freedom.

[@JasonBensleyDrain]

@M3PanoS Us as humans do, you can't necessarily get everyone to agree, I would penalize them because to not do so would be detrimental to humanity.

[@JasonBensleyDrain]

@M3PanoS I've already told you what I believe should be the foundation for morality. Setting up a moral system based on what benefits humanity as a whole. And yeah, people do believe they are closer to the moral standard if they have differing opinions, what is your point there?

[@JasonBensleyDrain]

@M3PanoS I completely agree, but why does the compulsion have to be God?

[@Mathenaut]

@ChristianApologics The irony is something to be appreciated.

[@OutOfTheBoxThinker]

@wretcherwretch : IMO, tolerance means that you accept that other people have a different mindset, a different lifestyle, a different view on religion, a different view on politics or just a different look from yours even if this offends you or someone else. What bothers me about the word "tolerance" is that it's most commonly used (especially by liberals) to mask their own intolerance towards those they disagree with. They accuse other of being intolerant and use that accusation to silence them

[@MrvlZmb]

I haven't said anything about my personal ideology. Have you a response to the problem I mentioned of homosexuals' rights being denied? Would relinquishing that position push us further toward anarchy?

[@4thcoming]

I meant based.

[@Martinroadsguy]

@jsbodybuilding2 No, that would be an infinitely regressive argument. Not making a claim is simply not making a claim.

[@4thcoming]

@OutOfTheBoxThinker Have you ever read Greg's book Tactics OOTBT?

[@4thcoming]

@OutOfTheBoxThinker ZZ is a female and I said your comments are similar to hers. This is what Thomas Woodward talked about in his book Darwin Strikes Back and that is Darwinists and atheists not doing their homework on their opponents or on ID. I think I sent you a pm with 3 sections from Woodwards book on a few days ago. I showed Greg's book to a professor in my college and he said that Greg displays a vast knowledge of critical thinking skills and knows about contradictions and logic.

[@OutOfTheBoxThinker]

@ajl36117 : Many people just happen to get emotional when they encounter people who use fairy tales and imaginary friends to mask their ignorance and prejudice and pretend that have ANY understanding of the world. I do not encourage people to use offensive language when addressing Christians and I have similar complaints about people of other faiths and atheists alike, however I do understand that some people are just so frustrated bout all this they result to using offensive language.

[@TheRuggedWay]

@Mathenaut what do you mean by respecting the private beliefs of others?

[@OutOfTheBoxThinker]

@MajesticCyru : I have looked at every single argument for ID I could find so far. As long as they can't provide a single argument in favor of ID that's both logically valid and consistent with the scientific evidence, then what's the point? If they can't make a valid point in their populist propaganda, why would they be able to make a valid point in a 300 page book? What sciences interest me? Anything from maths and physics to psychology and sociology I'd say ;-)

[@OutOfTheBoxThinker]

@4thcoming : Just because someone is a professor, that doesn't mean he has a clue. Here in Europe all universities have pretty high standards but in the US pretty much any moron can start his own university. As a consequence, the difference between Ivy League universities like Harvard or Yale and your average Christian diploma mill (where charlatans like Kent Hovint get their titles) couldn't be greater. I already mentioned pretty strong arguments against ID in previous communication with you.

[@JasonBensleyDrain]

@M3PanoS How do you justify saying that you "are sure" I believe in objective morality?

[@Redington931]

John 17:3 "'And this is eternal life, that they know you the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent.'" 1 John 1:6 "If we say we have fellowship with Him while we walk in darkness, we lie and do not practice the truth." Matthew 7:22-23 "'On that day many will say to me, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and case out demons in your name, and do many might works in your name?' And then I will declare to them, "I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness'"

[@JasonBensleyDrain]

@M3PanoS To give you an example, think of art. There are many things that we all as humans agree qualify as art. Our "standard" in this case. However, there are people who will contend whether or not a certain piece is art or not. In morality there are situations such as these. Is it morally wrong for me to smoke weed or do drugs? is it morally wrong for me to get upset if I am justified, or should I deal with the situation in a calmer way. These are not so clear cut as murder or rape.

[@drumrnva]

Sure, sure...in some ways, maybe both people will end up falling under the heading "intolerant". But riddle me this: will both parties consider the others' souls to be damned if they don't get on board with the sacrifice and resurrection of their deity? Will a non-believer ever harbor beliefs about the believer that extend beyond known natural boundaries?

[@MrvlZmb]

What "posts outside this thread?" I directly indicted Christianity for its stance on homosexuality in this same thread. What is your feeling on the matter?

[@OutOfTheBoxThinker]

@MajesticCyru (1) The English crown has been under control of the cartel for about 200 years and the Vatican for about a few decades. Both the queen and the pope have become mere puppets of the Rothschilds and their friends. (2) As the power of the Jews rose, the power of Rome decreased. In Europe, Catholicism is disappearing. The Vatican is clearly not in charge. (3) The universe is not generally thought to have a cause and the Big Bang is not generally accepted as its beginning.

[@OutOfTheBoxThinker]

@MajesticCyru : My girlfriend is actually a bio-engineer specialised in DNA research and everything she's learnt about DNA during her education and work has only confirmed the reality of evolution. DNA shows us exactly how and when one species developed into another. Also, scientists don't KNOW whether the Big Bang truely was the beginning of the universe and if your God doesn't need a cause there's no reason to assume the universe needs one. Your making one unproven assumption after the other

[@MrvlZmb]

Certainly. Christianity, as expressed by many modern Christians, is intolerant of sexual freedom, women's rights, and contraception -- and that's just in the public sphere. Privately, Christianity forbids the worship of other gods, lust, and other actions that are only sins because God says so, and not because of an objective moral standard. As a former Christian, I was conditioned to feel guilty for merely doubting my faith or questioning biblical authority. Seems rather oppressive to me.

[@JasonBensleyDrain]

@M3PanoS Of course Christians believe they are sinners, but they also believe that their moral system is superior to any other. Even so, that is not why I see many Christians as intolerant. I see Christians as intolerant because of the tendency to vilify groups such as gays and other religious groups outside Christianity.

[@JasonBensleyDrain]

@M3PanoS No, believing in objectivity and believing in objective morality are very different. And what makes you so sure that Jesus is the source of all morality?

[@OutOfTheBoxThinker]

@4thcoming : I can assure you I'm not this ZZ guy you mention ;-) No, I haven't read anything by Kookl. Based on this interview and his videos on KZbin, I see no reason why I should care to read anything he wrote. He seems no less ignorant than Lee Strobel and other apologists of their ilk.

[@4thcoming]

@OutOfTheBoxThinker See my below comments. Have you ever read any books on ID? I myself have read books from Darwins Origin to Dawkins The God Delusion. Author Bruce Shieman points out in his book An Atheist Defends Religion that fundamentalist and militant atheists have ruined science along with Fundamentalist religious people as well. There are many flaws in Evolution. Interesting to note that author Thomas Woodwards books are about the rhetoric & history of ID and Darwinian evolution.

[@JasonBensleyDrain]

@M3PanoS Well if it isn't then I guess not the way you're defining it. I don't really understand why you're insisting the standard must be transcendent and absolute. But I guess we're at an impasse there. And I have already given you my foundation for morality. Also, I must counter a bit here. I don't know if you're familiar with the Euthyphro dilemma, but if not it is basically this: 1/2

[@MrvlZmb]

Google "No True Scotsman Fallacy."

[@JasonBensleyDrain]

@M3PanoS No, I don't believe in any objective morality. This is not saying that we should just let people do what they want or that if something is right for me it isn't necessarily right for somebody else. I believe we should base morality off how whichever action we are talking about affects humanity and society as a whole. And what is the basis of Christian morality? God doesn't seem very moral to me...

[@4thcoming]

@OutOfTheBoxThinker You sound like ZZ on Cryptozoologydotcom's evolution vs creationism debate forum.

[@thecarlitosshow7687]

It’s a double standard lol Relativism

[@OutOfTheBoxThinker]

@4th:I don't see a single reason to read any material on ID any more than I see a reason to read the nonsense of Craig or Strobel. I thusfar haven't heard a single argument in favor of ID that's both logically valid and consistent with the scientific evidence. Only if that changes will I consider reading such literature. Meanwhile, I have better things to do. No, there aren't flaws in evolution. It's true, though, that neo-Marxists have messed up the human sciences, but that's a different issue

[@Mathenaut]

@JesusCannotFail Anecdotal evidence isn't much. You're going to have to explore the wider media regarding Christians actively harassing atheists, muslims, pagans, and pretty much anyone non-Christian around schools and local communities. There is a good news documentary called The Price of Atheism, which is a good start.

[@OutOfTheBoxThinker]

@MajesticCyru : (1) The banking, oil and pharmaceutical cartels are controlled by the Rothschilds and other top Jewish families. The Vatican lost most of its power during the last two centuries. (2) My girlfriend is a scientist. She isn't anyone's student. (3) The Big Bang theory was first coined by a Catholic priest. Regardless, though, it doesn't imply ID at all. (4) Carbon dating does not point to a young earth. (5) The universe is moving apart and we can trace it back to 15 bill. years ago

[@keksinnot]

Not wanting to change your beliefs when they are proven wrong is idiotic. To challenge other fellow's beliefs without having your own beliefs checked is arrogant and stupid.

[@OutOfTheBoxThinker]

@ajl36117 : Actually, American atheists in the Bible belt who dare to speak openly of their atheistic beliefs are constantly discriminated by religious zealots for no other reason but being an atheist. The same is true for other areas, but not as extreme. You really have no idea how common hatemongering and discrimination by Christians really is if you've never been one of their usual targets.

[@JasonBensleyDrain]

@M3PanoS Cont: "Is something moral because it is commanded by God, or is commanded by God because it is moral" The problem for you is this, in the first instance, there is a higher standard than God even, that transcends even him. In the second case, the problem is that morality is arbitrary. God could command rape and murder (which he in fact does) and it would be moral.

[@OutOfTheBoxThinker]

@wretch : Both liberals and neocons tend to be very ignorant, very indoctrinated, very narrowminded and very intolerant. Neocons just tend to be more ignorant and liberals tend to be more intolerant. Overall, however, neither side is better than the other and both are just slaves of corporate interests anyway. On real issues (Jews and Zionism, Iran, tax cuts for the rich, immigration, globalist capitalism, ...) no dissent is allowed and you're labeled an extremist or ridiculed by the media.

[@Martinroadsguy]

This was one of the more nonsensical nonanswers to such a question I've ever heard. I've never heard someone say someone is intolerant just because they think they're right. Thats ridiculous. The intolerance comes from thinking that you're right and claiming that it makes you a morally superior person, and that people who are wrong are evil. Especially when you have nothing more to go on, or even less, to show that you're right and others are wrong aside from your own belief's scriptures.

[@OutOfTheBoxThinker]

@4thc : The evidence is overwhelming in favor of evolution and the arguments for ID are based solely on logical fallacies. I addressed this before. So why doesn't this convince you or any other fundamentalist Christians you say? Fundamentalist Christians seem to live in their own little fantasy world where logic is shoved aside and replaced by emotional arguments. Craig and Strobel are masters in this sort of emotional rhetoric and have attacted quite an audience, but their logic is laugable !

[@BLJazzman]

I think I'm right because all of the scientific evidence supports my view(pick whatever topic you like). You think you're right because your magic book told you so.

[@Mathenaut]

@jordan19862000 Christians have a long history of crying oppression while they actively suppress rival belief systems. It is something they have become even more wildly aggressive about recently. They have no respect for others, yet demand full reference of their deity from everyone. It's the worst kind of hypocrisy.

[@OutOfTheBoxThinker]

@MajesticCyru : You're referencing a quote by a Creationist engineer who died in 1945 from a book written by a biologist written in 1954 explaining why religion is a threat to science. Not only is this quote totally irrelevant since scientific advances have provided a vast amount of DNA evidence for evolution since 1954, maybe you should actually read Riddle's "The Unleashing of Evolutionary Thought" as its perspective is little different from Dawkins' or Hitchens'.

[@MrvlZmb]

Your attempted digression toward a semantic debate on ideology is distracting from the original point: That Christianity often seeks to prohibit personal freedoms and deny human rights. Can I get a clear statement from you on gay marriage? You have yet to address it.

[@OutOfTheBoxThinker]

@ajl36117 : * breeds

[@BLJazzman]

@KingJamesBible You've got the burden of proof backwards. If you want me to believe that what the bible says is true, you need to present evidence for that. I've not seen any, but I'm open to whatever you have to offer. I believe evolution occurred because of the overwhelming evidence of it. I believe the Earth revolves around the sun because of the evidence of cosmology. Show me why I should believe the bible. BTW, congrats on choosing the KJB, much better writing in there than other versions.

[@MrvlZmb]

First, you might want to look up the definition of "straw man." If you assert that's what I'm doing, then your "you could say the same thing about atheists..." does not support the assertion. Instead, you commit _tu quoque_ in merely putting the accusation back to the accuser. Nonetheless, I challenge you to show me an example of atheists prohibiting the freedom of Christians to practice their faith, enforcement of US Constitutional law notwithstanding.

[@tomfortmuller]

Your argument is also a straw man... you could say the same thing about atheists prohibiting the freedom of Christians to practice their faith.

[@Redington931]

It sounds like you were more a victim of moral deism than having new life in Christ; completely different things. The things you mentioned as evidence against Christianity makes it sounds like you never wanted Christ to begin with but your own false idol of Him. Freedom in Christ is being dead to the slavery of the world and the flesh in sin; not being dead in sin like the world's definition for freedom.

[@OutOfTheBoxThinker]

@ajl36117 : Many of these people have been treated in a hateful and discriminatory manner by Christian nutjobs for most of their lives so I guess this is what they're used to when it involves dealing with Christians. Your religion breads ignorance and prejudice...

[@Mathenaut]

You're not being called intolerant because you think you're right. You're being called intolerant because you're being an unreasonable, insufferable douche with respect to the private beliefs and practices of others. Christians bring alot of this ire down on themselves.