Comments on: One More Thing From Ray Comfort Before the Debate Airs http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2007/05/09/one-more-thing-from-ray-comfort-before-the-debate-airs/ by Hemant Mehta Sat, 26 May 2012 11:09:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.3 By: Chris mankey http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2007/05/09/one-more-thing-from-ray-comfort-before-the-debate-airs/#comment-105538 Chris mankey Sat, 22 Dec 2007 18:30:55 +0000 http://friendlyatheist.com/2007/05/09/one-more-thing-from-ray-comfort-before-the-debate-airs/#comment-105538 "Scared to open you mind to absolute truth found at the foot of the cross; like Kirk I once thought like everyone else until I decided to study up and think –" The absolute truth about the yummyness of the god's creation "The banana"? What are you even talking about? You study up and thought? I doubt it! oops I got saved, praising God for the last 6 years. Oh ok is therr a god to "praise? “Scared to open you mind to absolute truth found at the foot of the cross; like Kirk I once thought like everyone else until I decided to study up and think –”

The absolute truth about the yummyness of the god’s creation “The banana”? What are you even talking about?
You study up and thought? I doubt it!

oops I got saved, praising God for the last 6 years.

Oh ok is therr a god to “praise?

]]> By: Siamang http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2007/05/09/one-more-thing-from-ray-comfort-before-the-debate-airs/#comment-39472 Siamang Sat, 09 Jun 2007 05:14:11 +0000 http://friendlyatheist.com/2007/05/09/one-more-thing-from-ray-comfort-before-the-debate-airs/#comment-39472 Peggy, We try as hard as we can to see things with an open mind and an open heart. My open mind and open heart found atheism to be the most honest path for me. You can read my story of my journey from faith to atheism<a href="http://off-the-map.org/ebayatheist/viewtopic.php?t=247" rel="nofollow"> here.</a> Don't judge me until you've read my story. Please read it with an open mind and an open heart and you may see things from my point of view. Peggy,

We try as hard as we can to see things with an open mind and an open heart.

My open mind and open heart found atheism to be the most honest path for me.

You can read my story of my journey from faith to atheism here.

Don’t judge me until you’ve read my story. Please read it with an open mind and an open heart and you may see things from my point of view.

]]> By: peggy http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2007/05/09/one-more-thing-from-ray-comfort-before-the-debate-airs/#comment-39467 peggy Sat, 09 Jun 2007 04:34:29 +0000 http://friendlyatheist.com/2007/05/09/one-more-thing-from-ray-comfort-before-the-debate-airs/#comment-39467 I have a tendency to submit before i proofread so I need to make an adjustment my quote should have been “… I am amazed at how many people think that God’s existence is a matter of faith. It’s not, and I will prove it at the debate - once and for all. This is not a joke. I will present undeniable scientific proof that God exists. Again my points are directed to this statement, nowhere does it state his intention to "win" the arguement against the atheists. This statement says that he will prove God's existence and he did. If instead of searching and focusing on and getting your mind in a tangle tring to find that one word, or phrase that one can use to discredit his whole argument.try instead to the whole sentence and thoughts and concepts with an open mind you would see it from a different angle. I apoligize for my wrong comment. I have a tendency to submit before i proofread so I need to make an adjustment my quote should have been “… I am amazed at how many people think that God’s existence is a matter of faith. It’s not, and I will prove it at the debate – once and for all. This is not a joke. I will present undeniable scientific proof that God exists.

Again my points are directed to this statement, nowhere does it state his intention to “win” the arguement against the atheists. This statement says that he will prove God’s existence and he did.
If instead of searching and focusing on and getting your mind in a tangle tring to find that one word, or phrase that one can use to discredit his whole argument.try instead to the whole sentence and thoughts and concepts with an open mind you would see it from a different angle.

I apoligize for my wrong comment.

]]> By: peggy http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2007/05/09/one-more-thing-from-ray-comfort-before-the-debate-airs/#comment-39457 peggy Sat, 09 Jun 2007 02:48:52 +0000 http://friendlyatheist.com/2007/05/09/one-more-thing-from-ray-comfort-before-the-debate-airs/#comment-39457 I don' t know where you get that Ray is quoted as saying he wantted to win the debate. He says “Please pray that God uses this to reach the lost, because that’s our aim. It’s not to win an argument, it’s to reach the lost.” I did see the debate and the preview clip. I remember being an atheist when i was a teenager and i see myself how i used to be through the comments that I've read and the panelists and I see how I used to and hoe they focus on the wrong parts of a sentence or statement. For example instead of paying attention to the WHOLE statement or sentence I used to and they now look for any/one part that can be twisted or manipulated to confirm thier point of view. Read it again “Please pray that God uses this to reach the lost, because that’s our aim. It’s not to win an argument, it’s to reach the lost.” When one reads the whole statement it's obvious that his intention was to "reach the lost" I remember my english classes in high school and I may not remember the terminology but i remember that when reading a sentence or paragragh or chapter or book it's important to find the main idea opps i think I've discover come upon it. the "main idea." So the main idea of the sentence is his purpose which is to reach the lost! Unfortunately this mistake has taken place through out the debate. Unfortunately the atheists missed the many points and proofs, and they scrathed at nothing. For example they misread Kirk's and Ray's facial expression to mean that they were stumped when in fact they didn't respond because they had already answered the question. It's a look of "why beat a dead horse why waste my breathe, the words fell on the ears they were meant to fall on and were heard by who was meant to hear them" Atheist's need so ,much proof and stare (figuratively-I'm a terrible speller) so hard that they don't see what in front of them. Kindda like those pictures you have to look at and then another image appears. Come to think of it i was an atheist when i first started seeing those pictures and you know what, It never worked for me. Maybe I should try now with my new perspective. I don’ t know where you get that Ray is quoted as saying he wantted to win the debate. He says “Please pray that God uses this to reach the lost, because that’s our aim. It’s not to win an argument, it’s to reach the lost.”
I did see the debate and the preview clip. I remember being an atheist when i was a teenager and i see myself how i used to be through the comments that I’ve read and the panelists and I see how I used to and hoe they focus on the wrong parts of a sentence or statement. For example instead of paying attention to the WHOLE statement or sentence I used to and they now look for any/one part that can be twisted or manipulated to confirm thier point of view.
Read it again “Please pray that God uses this to reach the lost, because that’s our aim. It’s not to win an argument, it’s to reach the lost.”
When one reads the whole statement it’s obvious that his intention was to “reach the lost”
I remember my english classes in high school and I may not remember the terminology but i remember that when reading a sentence or paragragh or chapter or book it’s important to find the main idea opps i think I’ve discover come upon it. the “main idea.”
So the main idea of the sentence is his purpose which is to reach the lost!
Unfortunately this mistake has taken place through out the debate.
Unfortunately the atheists missed the many points and proofs, and they scrathed at nothing. For example they misread Kirk’s and Ray’s facial expression to mean that they were stumped when in fact they didn’t respond because they had already answered the question. It’s a look of “why beat a dead horse why waste my breathe, the words fell on the ears they were meant to fall on and were heard by who was meant to hear them”
Atheist’s need so ,much proof and stare (figuratively-I’m a terrible speller) so hard that they don’t see what in front of them. Kindda like those pictures you have to look at and then another image appears. Come to think of it i was an atheist when i first started seeing those pictures and you know what, It never worked for me. Maybe I should try now with my new perspective.

]]> By: Domomojo http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2007/05/09/one-more-thing-from-ray-comfort-before-the-debate-airs/#comment-26629 Domomojo Fri, 11 May 2007 01:25:57 +0000 http://friendlyatheist.com/2007/05/09/one-more-thing-from-ray-comfort-before-the-debate-airs/#comment-26629 Hemant, thank you for defending the so-called "rude" atheists in the ABC audience of which I was a member. I just posted my take on the scene in your other post here: http://friendlyatheist.com/2007/05/08/ray-comforts-email-to-his-fans/#comment-26624 Hemant, thank you for defending the so-called “rude” atheists in the ABC audience of which I was a member. I just posted my take on the scene in your other post here:

http://friendlyatheist.com/2007/05/08/ray-comforts-email-to-his-fans/#comment-26624

]]> By: Darryl http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2007/05/09/one-more-thing-from-ray-comfort-before-the-debate-airs/#comment-26394 Darryl Thu, 10 May 2007 04:30:20 +0000 http://friendlyatheist.com/2007/05/09/one-more-thing-from-ray-comfort-before-the-debate-airs/#comment-26394 I previously commented upon the topic of the low turn-out at the day of prayer event, and my primary point was that Christians don't really believe that prayer works. Along the same lines it also occurs to me that they don't believe in the gospel message either. According to the Apostle Paul, Christians preach the message of Christ, the holy spirit acts upon them by faith, and viola--we've got a rebirth! It's the preaching of the gospel story that is the "word of God" that acts upon the unbeliever, not logical arguments of the theistic kind. But, I’ll let the man speak for himself: <blockquote>For Christ did not send me to baptize but to preach the gospel, and not with the wisdom of human eloquence, so that the cross of Christ might not be emptied of its meaning. The message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. For it is written: "I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and the learning of the learned I will set aside." Where is the wise one? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made the wisdom of the world foolish? For since in the wisdom of God the world did not come to know God through wisdom, it was the will of God through the foolishness of the proclamation to save those who have faith. For Jews demand signs and Greeks look for wisdom, but we proclaim Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, but to those who are called, Jews and Greeks alike, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. For the foolishness of God is wiser than human wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than human strength. (I Corinthians ch. I)</blockquote> Paul’s argument cannot be more clear: My message is the gospel, not the wisdom of the world. Why? Because the wisdom of the world is not sufficient to come to the knowledge of God—it takes the gospel. The wisdom of the world in the form of theistic arguments was not a part of the Apostles’ preaching; it entered into the Church’s tradition from the outside, owing to the natural process of syncretism and the later rediscovery in the West of the Greek philosophers. Now, before you Christians go scurrying to your Bibles with joy in your hearts because you’re primed to defeat the infidel, allow me to preempt your attack. Yes, I’m aware of such passages as these: <blockquote>The heavens declare the glory of God; And the firmament shows his handiwork. (Psalm 19:1) For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse. (Romans ch. 1)</blockquote> Let us consider Paul’s statement to the church at Rome. This passage is often quoted as an example of the Cosmological Argument for God’s existence. First of all, notice that these words of Paul are being addressed not to infidels, but to Christians. Paul is not setting an example here for how to argue to unbelievers. Secondly, notice who it is that Paul says is making the theistic argument to the infidels—it is God himself, not Christians. Furthermore, it is God--not making theistic arguments using language--but letting his work speak for himself. Do Christians really believe in the power of the gospel to convert the infidel? If they do, then why do they contradict the Apostle Paul and try to convince us using theistic arguments? Mr. Comfort’s claim that he will present undeniable scientific proof that God exists is a wasted effort according to the Apostle Paul—it is the wisdom of the world that God has made foolish. If that which may be known about God is clearly revealed by what God has made, then why do Christians keep pestering us with their theistic arguments when God has spoken from Heaven? Is the gospel impotent? Is Paul wrong? If Paul is correct, then you Christians need to back off with the rhetoric; if he’s incorrect, then you folks need to come over to our side of the fence. I previously commented upon the topic of the low turn-out at the day of prayer event, and my primary point was that Christians don’t really believe that prayer works. Along the same lines it also occurs to me that they don’t believe in the gospel message either. According to the Apostle Paul, Christians preach the message of Christ, the holy spirit acts upon them by faith, and viola–we’ve got a rebirth! It’s the preaching of the gospel story that is the “word of God” that acts upon the unbeliever, not logical arguments of the theistic kind. But, I’ll let the man speak for himself:

For Christ did not send me to baptize but to preach the gospel, and not with the wisdom of human eloquence, so that the cross of Christ might not be emptied of its meaning. The message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. For it is written: “I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and the learning of the learned I will set aside.” Where is the wise one? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made the wisdom of the world foolish? For since in the wisdom of God the world did not come to know God through wisdom, it was the will of God through the foolishness of the proclamation to save those who have faith. For Jews demand signs and Greeks look for wisdom, but we proclaim Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, but to those who are called, Jews and Greeks alike, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. For the foolishness of God is wiser than human wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than human strength. (I Corinthians ch. I)

Paul’s argument cannot be more clear: My message is the gospel, not the wisdom of the world. Why? Because the wisdom of the world is not sufficient to come to the knowledge of God—it takes the gospel. The wisdom of the world in the form of theistic arguments was not a part of the Apostles’ preaching; it entered into the Church’s tradition from the outside, owing to the natural process of syncretism and the later rediscovery in the West of the Greek philosophers.

Now, before you Christians go scurrying to your Bibles with joy in your hearts because you’re primed to defeat the infidel, allow me to preempt your attack. Yes, I’m aware of such passages as these:

The heavens declare the glory of God; And the firmament shows his handiwork. (Psalm 19:1)

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse. (Romans ch. 1)

Let us consider Paul’s statement to the church at Rome. This passage is often quoted as an example of the Cosmological Argument for God’s existence. First of all, notice that these words of Paul are being addressed not to infidels, but to Christians. Paul is not setting an example here for how to argue to unbelievers. Secondly, notice who it is that Paul says is making the theistic argument to the infidels—it is God himself, not Christians. Furthermore, it is God–not making theistic arguments using language–but letting his work speak for himself.

Do Christians really believe in the power of the gospel to convert the infidel? If they do, then why do they contradict the Apostle Paul and try to convince us using theistic arguments? Mr. Comfort’s claim that he will present undeniable scientific proof that God exists is a wasted effort according to the Apostle Paul—it is the wisdom of the world that God has made foolish. If that which may be known about God is clearly revealed by what God has made, then why do Christians keep pestering us with their theistic arguments when God has spoken from Heaven? Is the gospel impotent? Is Paul wrong? If Paul is correct, then you Christians need to back off with the rhetoric; if he’s incorrect, then you folks need to come over to our side of the fence.

]]> By: Siamang http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2007/05/09/one-more-thing-from-ray-comfort-before-the-debate-airs/#comment-26338 Siamang Wed, 09 May 2007 23:29:32 +0000 http://friendlyatheist.com/2007/05/09/one-more-thing-from-ray-comfort-before-the-debate-airs/#comment-26338 Check the link for explanation. Check the link for explanation.

]]> By: Richard Wade http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2007/05/09/one-more-thing-from-ray-comfort-before-the-debate-airs/#comment-26337 Richard Wade Wed, 09 May 2007 23:21:34 +0000 http://friendlyatheist.com/2007/05/09/one-more-thing-from-ray-comfort-before-the-debate-airs/#comment-26337 ROFLMAO! Stop it! You're killing me! ROFLMAO! Stop it! You’re killing me!

]]> By: Siamang http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2007/05/09/one-more-thing-from-ray-comfort-before-the-debate-airs/#comment-26328 Siamang Wed, 09 May 2007 22:49:20 +0000 http://friendlyatheist.com/2007/05/09/one-more-thing-from-ray-comfort-before-the-debate-airs/#comment-26328 Chicken chicken chicken chicken chicken chicken chicken chicken chicken chicken. Chicken chicken chicken chicken chicken. <a href="http://scientianatura.blogspot.com/2007/05/best-scientific-talk-ever-chickens.html" rel="nofollow">Chicken chicken chicken.</a> Chicken chicken chicken chicken chicken chicken chicken chicken chicken chicken. Chicken chicken chicken chicken chicken.

Chicken chicken chicken.

]]> By: Richard Wade http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2007/05/09/one-more-thing-from-ray-comfort-before-the-debate-airs/#comment-26318 Richard Wade Wed, 09 May 2007 22:18:02 +0000 http://friendlyatheist.com/2007/05/09/one-more-thing-from-ray-comfort-before-the-debate-airs/#comment-26318 LOL! Bananas are naturally comic things, like chickens. They're just intrinsically funny. I always smile at the thought of a banana, but now I'll never be able to eat one without snickering. Somewhere right now somebody is printing up t-shirts with bananas in the form of a cross and some smart-ass slogan. Go for it! LOL! Bananas are naturally comic things, like chickens. They’re just intrinsically funny. I always smile at the thought of a banana, but now I’ll never be able to eat one without snickering. Somewhere right now somebody is printing up t-shirts with bananas in the form of a cross and some smart-ass slogan. Go for it!

]]>