I Challenged an Atheist's Arguments and Here's What Happened

[@Wmeester1971]

The start was already awkward. "Why do you not have a christian worldview" ? That is already showcasing the wrong mindset. Someone who does not believe in the existence of of pig-unicorns is not the one who should justify his non-belief. Likewise for a non-believer the question of why he does not believe the same as you do is a non-sensical start of the conversation. Its like asking "Why don't you collect stamps?" "Why don't you play hockey?" "Why don't you believe in the tooth fairy?" The answer would be very simple: "Why should I ?"

[@Quebolas]

I couldnt agree more. Atheists dont believe in god, thats all.

[@pathwaysrevealed4442]

Thank you. I was worried I was the only one noticing!

[@Yossarian.]

​@pathwaysrevealed4442 Nope. Absolutely everyone whose thought processes aren't intrinsically compromised through cognitive dissonance have noticed.

[@Certaintyexists888]

“The wrong mindset” based on what standard?

[@Yossarian.]

​@Certaintyexists888 It's based on a naturalistic standard, not a supernatural standard.

[@RealHooksy]

Why do you think atheism is true?! It’s not a positive claim so there is no “true”. If you don’t understand that you’ve not thought about it hard enough.

[@pathwaysrevealed4442]

NULL HYPOTHESIS FOR THE W!!! THANK YOU BRO!

[@Wmeester1971]

"Why do you think atheism is true?!" By saying this, you show you don't understand atheism. Atheism does not make any claims and therefore cannot be true or false. Its just the lack of belief in any gods.

[@RealHooksy]

No, he doesn’t need to prove anything to you. He’s not claiming the god exists, you are.

[@Certaintyexists888]

If someone doesn’t believe in God, there must be reasons why, correct?

[@RealHooksy]

@ yes, the same reasons they don’t believe anything

[@Yossarian.]

​@Certaintyexists888 Certainly there are reasons. 1. Possibly not indoctrinated as children. 2. Happy with the purpose they find for themselves in life so don't need to invent/ invoke purpose from elsewhere. 3. Have no overwhelming desire to live forever. 4. Aren't needy. 5. Recognise that it's all a little bit too s1lly and clearly man made to be true.

[@Certaintyexists888]

@@RealHooksy You are going to have to do better than that.

[@RealHooksy]

@@Certaintyexists888 I don’t actually , but I’ll hazard a guess it’s because they haven’t been convinced a god exists?

[@astinscience]

I would gladly accept an invitation from these folks. I think these are important conversations, and while this gentleman had good intentions, I think there are better arguments.

[@KaijuTheMusical]

Who is right? The Atheist till a Theist can back up their claims.

[@michaelbrickley2443]

You haven’t really looked at the evidence

[@KaijuTheMusical]

@@michaelbrickley2443 There is no evidence. That is why you didnt come with any and just asserted there was. You are free to present evidence but lets be real, even though you dont have it, you wont admit this. Because your not taking this seriously at all.

[@MaK-13-]

@@michaelbrickley2443 i have. its absolute sh!t.

[@duncanbryson1167]

​@@michaelbrickley2443 "Look at the trees"? 🙄

[@Certaintyexists888]

What is the atheist “right” about exactly?

[@Quebolas]

What a dishonest question to start. What do you mean his world view? Atheists are unconvinced theres a god. Thats it!

[@Wigz_12]

It's still a belief. A belief that there is no God.

[@timasimic4226]

Atheism is not a belief system. You know why? Because atheism doesn't believe anything. Atheism doesn't claim anything. All atheism is, is not believing the claim that a god exists. -Oh, but atheism believes that a god does not exist. No, that's not true. There are some atheists who believe that a god does not exist, but most atheists just don't believe the claim that a god exists. In fact, that is the only thing that all atheists have in common. They don't believe the claim that a god exists. Why? Because nobody ever presented sufficient evidence to warrant the belief in the existence of a god.@@Wigz_12

[@Charron684]

V​@@Wigz_12no it's being unconvinced that any god or gods exist by definition that can not be a belief

[@pathwaysrevealed4442]

The person being interviewed is either a poor representation of atheism, or a fellow church member who picked the short straw and had to play the evil atheist for their skit. I believe he's not even a real atheist. Listen to how his voice quivers when he says something potentially disparaging about Christianity. When he said "Atheism isn't a world view, it's just a claim.", I knew enough to know that this man isn't to be trusted. THERE IS NOT A SINGLE ATHEIST SPEAKER ALIVE TODAY THAT I HAVE EVER HEARD REPRESENT ATHEISM AS A "CLAIM". If anything, atheism by definition is the absence of any claims, in regards to religion. It is a true null hypothesis.

[@pathwaysrevealed4442]

@@Wigz_12 No, it's not. Its a null hypothesis.

[@igormelnichuk4095]

Love these interactions brother. Firm and to the point. Held his feet to the fire

[@salserokorsou]

By asking ignorant questions?

[@DerQuoi]

you got me at the christian hustlers university advertisement at the end xD

[@andresvillarreal9271]

You are completely, utterly, absolutely wrong about not being able to test uniformity in nature and induction. There is no "proof" of induction but there are literally millions of tests that have been successfully done on both, giving us a very good idea of where we can use them and where we can not. In science you make predictions based on the hypothesis that the field of study is reasonably adaptable to induction and uniform in the way its processes work. Then you test the predictions with experiments and observations that had not been done before and you learn whether this specific field of study is uniform in certain ways. Then you have a guide to the cases where you can apply uniformity and induction. We, the scientists, have multiplied the collective knowledge of our societies many, many times over. You have nothing to show.

[@Certaintyexists888]

He knows you w rely on uniformity in nature. The commitment to that reliance is faith.

[@andresvillarreal9271]

@@Certaintyexists888 Bad scientists and pseudoscientists blindly rely on uniformity in nature. Good scientists use uniformity as a first hypothesis and cross-check the results from several experiments and observations to see if uniformity holds for the specific case that they are studying. For example, they cross-study fossils, geological strata, genetics, and radioactive decay to see if there is uniformity in biological evolution. Blind reliance is faith but real scientists, (i.e. not pseudoscientific apologists) do not rely on anything that cannot eventually be verified.

[@RealHooksy]

The earth revolved around the sun yesterday, the day before, and everyday before that, as far as we can tell. I’m extremely confident that it will keep doing the same thing unless something acts upon it to change that. I can’t see that happening but if it does I’ll stand directed. Regardless, I don’t try to tell people how to live their lives because of that. You on the other hand seem to be happy to take some words in an old book as gospel. Who’s more rational?

[@FactsMattuh]

I'm a non-believer because I don't believe in any specific God, although I'm open should some evidence become available and I can somehow investigate all the other Gods. Complicated stuff, ya know? But at the end of the day, for me it comes down to the simple fact that a person can't force themselves to believe something. It's like forcing yourself to like broccoli - ain't gonna happen unless it...happens.

[@SundayVibesmusic]

If I asked you what is 1+1= and the 3rd answer said 2….even though I gave you 100,000 options to choose from..would you really have to go through all 100,000 answers even though you know the right answer is 2? Once you know Christianity is true and if it is true no other religion can be true then it makes all other 100,000 religions obsolete. Not in a prideful, way just in a factual logical way. But I don’t believe anyone can force you to follow Christ. Not everyone wants to follow Christ. People like the idea of a God in their own imagination but when they learn about the God of scripture many people don’t like him or want to be with him.

[@FactsMattuh]

@@SundayVibesmusic Well, I guess if I saw the evidence I'd need to be a believer, perhaps I could look beyond all the others. But I do tend to like studying all the options. BUT point being, even if I WANTED to believe, it's not something I could force myself to do. So I feel any kind of punishment doled out to humans who can't force themselves to believe in something is misdirected at best.

[@MaK-13-]

@@SundayVibesmusic your analogy doesnt work. we know the answer is 2 before we even look at option 1, because we already know the math. we dont already know the god. you first have to prove that god exists just like 1+1=2. if xianity is true, sure it disproves all other religions. same if any other religion is proven true it disproves xianity. the problem is you havent shown any god to be even possible, let alone true, let alone a specific god, let alone your version of a specific god.

[@ajhieb]

@@SundayVibesmusic So, I'm willing to grant you that _if_ Christianity is true, then no other religion is, rendering that particular criticism moot. However, the real question is how do you _know_ that Christianity is true?

[@Wigz_12]

@@ajhieb Because Jesus died and rose from the dead proving who he is and what he claims to be. The apostles and disciples died for something they claim to have seen, that they saw Jesus dying and rising from the dead. No one dies for something they know is a lie..

[@kcr68xx]

A agnostic atheist does not to prove anything to be "true" or "false". Still waiting for Christians to prove their god. That their book of claims of a god are "true".

[@MichaelMeridius]

Why can't any theist demonstrate the existence of their god(s)?

[@Certaintyexists888]

“Existence” in a material sense?

[@MichaelMeridius]

@@Certaintyexists888 Theists can't produce any verifiable evidence of their supposed god(s) existence in any sense.

[@Certaintyexists888]

@@MichaelMeridius We all presuppose “unverifiable” laws such as the laws o logic.

[@MichaelMeridius]

@@Certaintyexists888 Thanks for conceding you can't provide verifiable evidence of any god's existence in reality.

[@Certaintyexists888]

@@MichaelMeridius I’m trying to point out that you and I rely on an immaterial, invariant reality. And you cannot empirically “verify” what you are presupposing.

[@RealHooksy]

So, no Muslim scientists, or Jewish scientists, or Chinese scientists, etc etc…?! Hmmm 😂

[@DogRodney]

18:10 hahahahaha. are we done? Yeah were done hahahaha !!!!!

[@cbviadfgbvladfk]

Imagine you have a house and 2 blind people locked inside. One is a Christian and one is a scientist. The scientist would begin building their understanding through evidence, observation, and repetition. "Oh I bumped into wall 10 paces from that last wall, let me walk back and make sure it was 10, oops miscounted it was 11, lets try again, ok 11 that's better I think I'm confident in the distances now, I'll remember that and continue my analysis of this houses mysteries" The Christian says" nope that wall is 5 steps away, God told me" and refuses to acknowledge when he doesn't step into a wall 5 steps away. "Must be a test of faith!!" Scientist (who also turns out to be deaf and thus can't hear the Christians BS) goes on with his life happily mapping the exact details of his surroundings and making note of the different switches and furniture and smells and temperatures until he now has the entire layout of the house committed to memory and wrote it all in a braille notebook. The scientist knows where the thermostat is so he can be comfortable, knows where the fridge is so he can eat, knows where the bed is so he can sleep comfortably. The Christian reads the Scientists book and uses it to find all these wonderful things the scientist discovered and is so grateful to God for giving him these wonderful things! The house is our world and the natural laws we can learn and study and apply. That braille book is all the scientific works ever written by humanity. The Christian lives comfortably in the world because scientists are endlessly curious and will not accept that a wall 10 paces away is actually only 5 because "God says so". Scientists make MRI machines to detect cancer, they made microwaves to cook your food fast, processors so you can argue with me, drugs to cure infections, tools to build wells, pipes to carry water. SCIENCE IS NOT A BELIEF. Science is a series of actions that have given humans everything they have. The Christian swoops in like the kid who never showed up for the group project and puts his name on it. You say God did all this? OK you Christians can sit back with your feet up while we put in the fucking work to gather evidence. Why are Christians so afraid to try and understand why a nuclear reactor provides heat? because the underlying principles of radioactive decay would support radio- dating and ruin their young earth theory. Go on Christians, lets see you run all the nuclear power plants in the U.S and see if God can step in for ya.

[@MichaelWilliams-eq4kt]

Western society was known as Christendom for the last 1,700 years. During the earlier 1,200 of the past 1,400 years, Christians held Islam at bay with a hell of a lot of bloodshed. With atheism at the wheel of Western civilisation for barely a century, your people have managed to surgically remove the balls of the few children you permit to escape immolation, collapse the human birth rate in favour of fur baby adoption rates, and open the floodgates to Islarm's most rapid geographical expansion since Mowharmmed's original jeehad. Right now, several European countries are on the brink of testing our shareea as a political system and the rest of all Western countries have sizeable minorities who are effectively repurposing "our democracy" to establish their blasphemy laws as the law of our land and our streets to call for the establishment of the califate. You should make some time to rehearse the sharharda and try on your burkah. And learn to stop mouthing off - they don't take kindly to effeminates speaking out of turn.

[@Josh_e_Perry]

Great conversation, the opening was awkward. I would appreciate the opportunity to be on your show. I'm an atheist, but I'm just a normal guy. I'm not a scientist. Please let me know if you have any interest in having another Atheist on.

[@TheThinkInstitute]

@Josh_e_Perry we will be doing more livestreams in the new year, Lord willing. You’re welcome to join one.

[@DHPshow]

This is my favorite type of content on here

[@TheThinkInstitute]

Good to know that.

[@OrlandoSmith]

Circular meanings is not the answer. the bible is not the answer for the bible. you need more proof

[@JB-yb4wn]

I have a piece of paper upon which is written that god exists. What more proof do you need? 🤣

[@lizadowning4389]

@@JB-yb4wn I will only believe it when he appears on Anderson Cooper.

[@JB-yb4wn]

@@lizadowning4389 And you get a fish, and you get a fish...

[@danielmartinsson899]

The host at 06:30 🤦

[@firedome8]

If a miracle manifests it becomes something you can measure and thus not supernatural...your video is a good lesson in what is not logic reason or what is evidentiary that makes up reality, truth is what the facts are and you are wrong.

[@mustachemac5229]

I found it extremely interesting that you guys moved away from the statement about future predictions and how we can know the earth orbits the sun. Almost like you guys knew It was a really bad talking point.😮 I do agree that the non-believer didn't do a very good job at defending his beliefs.

[@TheThinkInstitute]

There are some (myself included) who believe that the Bible does teach that the earth revolves around the sun. So, I don't remember what was said, but it wasn't as nefarious as you think. Christians aren't conniving liars, the way atheists often think.

[@mustachemac5229]

@TheThinkInstitute Nowhere in the Bible does it describe the Earth revolving around the Sun. Please give me the scripture. (Edit) I also don't think that it was something nefarious, I just think it was a really bad talking point and that's why you guys moved on from it.

[@Wmeester1971]

@@TheThinkInstitute That is a post-hoc rationalisation. Its not what the bible teaches us, its how the bible can be reconciled with the new facts.... and with some considerable mental gymnastics IMO.

[@hendraanthony4370]

Theist guy: are you familiar with inductibe reasoning? Atheist guy (has no idea what it is, but proceed to shamelessly lie): yeah Theist guy: proof that you understand it Atheist guy blabbera about unrelated stuf

[@JB-yb4wn]

Atheist Guy: Prove your god exists. Theist Guy: Mah Bahble sayz so. Atheist Guy: The bible is the claim, not evidence. Theist Guy: blabbers about unrelated stuff.

[@user-di8gh5fw6d]

Check out holy koolaid, Aronra, apostate prophet, Dr Jay smith etc 🐑

[@frederikbf6783]

Jeez what a load of crap.

[@TheJPomp]

Every The Line watcher here catching fallacy after thought-ending thought throughout this video.

[@brendanbosma2773]

I always find the slavery argument funny because all abolitionist movements were Christian.

[@TheThinkInstitute]

Yes

[@Diviance]

Hard for them not to be Christian when Christians spent most of the last 2,000 years violently oppressing non-Christians, especially atheists, wherever Christians had any power. Same as the arguments about scientists hundreds of years ago being Christian. Yeah? Of course they claimed to be Christian, you guys ended their lives in the streets or put them in jail if they weren't. Non-Christians couldn't even get access to books and equipment. So of course they were "all Christian".

[@mustachemac5229]

@@brendanbosma2773 All abolitionist movements were Christian? That isn't true at all. There are countries that abolished that action which weren't that belief.

[@malinko35]

@@mustachemac5229 They're specifically referencing the many abolitionists movements in America, which were Christian.

[@mustachemac5229]

@@malinko35 That may be true. But a majority of people who argued for the movement to keep people as properly used the Bible as confirmation. Think about it.

[@Balstrome1]

The Bible defines God pretty clearly. And when we look at the world, we do not find such a thing in the world. Basically the bible is evidence that the God of the Bible does not exist. So the bible makes the atheists case without having the atheist do anything.

[@MaK-13-]

after hearing the theist's case, the defense rests.

[@FollowAtheism-wk7jy]

Its EASY to debunk the byble. All one has to do is demonstrate that there's no ocean above the sky, as genesis claims. That right there debunks it. The byble isn't inerrant.

[@Keiji555]

First off, Bible, not byble. Have some respect. Second off, There's someone who actually studied all the locations Saint Luke went through, being one of the most educated historians of the time, and archeologically searched and found every town he was in, both in his secular writings and Biblical writings. He also interviewed Saint Paul, Saint Peter and even Mary, Mother of Jesus. And using Genesis to handwave the entire Bible? Weak. I could easily say that a religious and historical figure like Joan of Arc was proven that she does not qualify for any psychiatric or neurological diagnosis in the DSM-V, no matter how many people claim she is schizophrenic, Bipolar, and every other diagnosis in the book, which stumped scientists today, when they look at her through an atheistic lens.

[@ajhieb]

@@Keiji555 _"There's someone who actually studied all the locations Saint Luke went through, being one of the most educated historians of the time, and archeologically searched and found every town he was in, both in his secular writings and Biblical writings. He also interviewed Saint Paul, Saint Peter and even Mary, Mother of Jesus. "_ I thoroughly researched the writings of C.S. Lewis and verified that every town in England and every historical event he referenced actually happened. So, to be consistent I'm sure you accept that Narnia, Charn, The Wood Between The Worlds, are all real places, right? _"And using Genesis to handwave the entire Bible? Weak."_ When claims are being made of the inerrancy of the entire book, one need not get past Genisis to do so. _"I could easily say that a religious and historical figure like Joan of Arc was proven that she does not qualify for any psychiatric or neurological diagnosis in the DSM-V"_ I didn't realize the DSM-V was the standard for miraculous claims.

[@lizadowning4389]

@@Keiji555 You: “being one of the most educated historians of the time” So you claim ... despite there is not a shred of historical evidence for that. But it gets worse. Both the gospel and acts texts are anonymous, just like the other canonical gospels. Churchfathers later on started attributing the name Luke to these texts, just as they did with the other gospels. That’s why it is called “the gospel according to Luke”. So why does “one of the most educated historian of Antiquity” write ‘books’-really nothing more than fanfiction about a Jew called Jesus-without signing them? E.g. Tacitus ... did author his Histories and Annals. And we know in detail who he was ... yet of your ‘esteemed Luke’ ... we know nothing.

[@Keiji555]

@@ajhieb 1) Dafuq? What does this have to do about Lewis? You really are grasping at straws, and aren't really versed in proper debate. We aren't talking obvious fiction writers like Lewis or Tolkien. One can make arguments over Flood Myths like with Noah that is common in many mythologies, which massive Floods did happen historically, But overall, going at the initial chapters of Genesis, instead of tackling the New Testament which is what Christianity is more focused on, and even some of the more important books of Christian beliefs, should be focused on and debated. Unfortunately, for many in various Atheist communities, she is seen as a charlatan, and they try to attribute disabilities upon her, in order to explain away her miraculous and prophetic events. And she isn't the only prophet and religious figure that was brought forth to disprove Christianity and Catholicism in this fashion. And often, this is common in English and American historical circles.

[@ajhieb]

@@Keiji555 _" What does this have to do about Lewis? You really are grasping at straws, and aren't really versed in proper debate. We aren't talking obvious fiction writers like Lewis or Tolkien. "_ We're talking about books that portray past events. To categorize either book, a priori, as fiction or non-fiction is simply question begging. The truth of the books is what's in question, and your methodology for this clearly flawed as demonstrated by applying your logic to other books. _"One can make arguments over Flood Myths like with Noah that is common in many mythologies, which massive Floods did happen historically, But overall, going at the initial chapters of Genesis, instead of tackling the New Testament which is what Christianity is more focused on, and even some of the more important books of Christian beliefs, should be focused on and debated."_ If you're claiming the whole book is inerrant, then the whole book is up for scrutiny. Simple as that. _"Unfortunately, for many in various Atheist communities, she is seen as a charlatan, and they try to attribute disabilities upon her, in order to explain away her miraculous and prophetic events. And she isn't the only prophet and religious figure that was brought forth to disprove Christianity and Catholicism in this fashion. And often, this is common in English and American historical circles."_ Not sure what any of that has to do with you trying to substantiate miracle claims with the DSM-V. But to be clear, the only thing more disingenuous than trying to pull off a post-mortem psychological diagnosis is to try and and claim a post-mortem clean bill of mental health. You have no idea what diagnoses she did and didn't qualify for, and if you were qualified to make a diagnosis in the first lace, you'd know the circumstances preclude you from doing so here.

[@firedome8]

Their is no defense.

[@charlesm7874]

Both are wrong... Every religion is wrong. People like Noah or Abraham. Were not Jewish, Hebrew, Islam or Christian. They believed in a Creator of the world and tried to live a life that was kind, loving, and fair to everyone.

[@salserokorsou]

I stopped playing the video right before the 7 minutes mark cuz that question about the earth and the sun was way too stupid.

[@Kyle-my5il]

Bro lost as soon as he said “42,000 denominations”- clearly he hasn’t done research

[@ajhieb]

Yeah, most sources suggest it's closer to 45,000. Perhaps he was just being charitable.

[@Kyle-my5il]

@@ajhieb What sources?

[@ajhieb]

@@Kyle-my5il A quick google search for starters. But if you have something more credible, I'm all ears.

[@lizadowning4389]

@@Kyle-my5il "What sources"? They are literally the first responses in a Google search. Apparently the numbers come from the Center for the study of Global Christianity. It states 45,000 (approx.) and elaborates ... "Three major sources for international religious demography are: -Censuses where a religion and/or ethnicity question is asked -Surveys & polls -Data from religious communities" They even reference the methodology of the actual surveys held worldwide ... So for a guy who was so quick to denigrate the atheist debater as "not having done his research", you show a baffling level of dishonesty and ill character. But hey, that is the hallmark of religious fundamentalists, isn't it?

[@MaK-13-]

@@lizadowning4389 dont cite sources, or they run away.

[@firedome8]

Hard to listen to this nonsense , somehow your version of religion is correct. Your living in a false reality and thats ok till it intrudes into the actual world .

[@magish7713]

I agree, I would rather pull a wisdom tooth out without anesthetic.

[@JStrummer1]

Lol. You didn't challenge anybody.

[@Musashi]

I believe in god, but personally don't understand why uniformity in nature and scientific induction proves gods existence.

[@MaK-13-]

it doesnt.

[@Wigz_12]

@@MaK-13- Because Explosion only causes destruction aka the big bang. Order can't arise from chaos. If there's really no God then everything should be random and changing. The earth revolving around the sun 365 days a year is a miracle if atheism is true.

[@grantm6514]

It doesn't. Nature _demonstrates_ uniformity, and induction is a survival skill that has helped every living creature get this far. Young squirrels born on a branch will all freeze or fall off and die. Those born in a cozy nest will thrive. In autumn every year it gets cooler, and soon after that acorns are harder to find. Any squirrel that sees a pattern in these things has demonstrated inductive reasoning, and is more likely to survive and propagate than one that hasn't figured it out.

[@ajhieb]

This is one of my favorite thing that Christian apologist, (and specifically presuppositional apologists) get almost completely wrong. They'll point to Hume's Problem of Induction and then dive into "uniformity of nature" as if that's what the problem of induction is all about. This of course only demonstrates that these guys have no idea what Hume actually said regarding induction. Sure, _a_ problem with justifying induction is one can't know with certainty that the rules that applied today will also apply tomorrow, but that's only a fraction of the problem of induction. And that particular issue is only an issue in so much as it means that any conclusions drawn from induction are necessarily provisional. If I don't treat the conclusions from induction as absolute and immutable, then there isn't any tension. But the larger issue with induction is we have no way of determining if some series of events actually has a cause-effect relationship of if it's just coincidental. If I see A happen and then 30 seconds later B happens, and that pattern continues 5 times, it seems _likely_ that there is some correlation, and possible causation, but there is no way to know that for sure. And this is an issue that effects the theist and atheist alike. Theists often act like they've solved the problem of induction, but most of them don't even understand what the problem actually is.

[@Musashi]

@ajhieb Thanks!

[@emmarentiastipp2103]

The Bible and science do not contradict each other.

[@ajhieb]

Except where the Bible says the Earth was created before the sun and science says the sun was formed before the earth. That's just on the first page. Plenty of other contradictions after that.

[@lizadowning4389]

As long as you accept that the Hebrew Bible is allegorical, as Jews do, and even Augustine in the 5th centurt CE, and these texts make no real scientific claims. But then of course it follows that there's no intersection between the Bible and science. Hence, the statement that "the Bible and science do not contradict each other" is null and void.

[@MaK-13-]

lol. sure they do...

[@lizadowning4389]

@@MaK-13- Only to literalists, which is quite the modern take on the biblical texts. People in antiquity didn't 'see' it that way.

[@MaK-13-]

@@lizadowning4389 dont all the miracles contradict science? those were believed (by believers) since the first bible was written.

[@firedome8]

😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂