Matt Dillahunty's Rant Against Biblical Morality - Atheist Experience
Vložit
- čas přidán 9. 03. 2014
- Matt gets tired of hearing the excuses made by people for biblical morality. Click here to go to the Atheist Experience channel - / theatheistexperience
Funny how Christians are all about the bible until you show them what's actually in it.
What is both sad and hilarious is to listen to them try to justify all the immorality of their bible. They don't realize that most atheists have actually read the bible from cover to cover and know far more about what's in it than they do.
They don't believe you believe me i tried my family wouldn't believe me about psalms 137: 9 Blessed is he who bashes babies against rocks like wtf
When they read the book they get angry at truth.
“It is forbidden to kill; therefore all murderers are punished unless they kill in large numbers and to the sound of trumpets.”
Slavery if its slightly different means its ok. That is so messed up that someone would think that way.
"Its not slavery, its really happy friendly nice slavery!"
LMFAO!
I love how the caller said “I’m in favor of slavery” and then he realized how horrible that sounded and had to quickly think on the spot to try and make it sound logical.
People like this are the reason we had slavery for so long in America. People are able to justify anything in their minds no matter how bad it is.
Well done matt. You've got it covered. The people who wrote that book, just wrote down their own morals.
"I'm in favor of slavery....okay...hold on..."
Oof. Boy, he sure didn't think that through.
“Never let your sense of morals prevent you from doing what is right.”
5:53 "and women need to shut their holes." "well......I'm just going to leave that there".......this had me laughing hard.
Matt,
Very Well Stated, Thank You
Do you know how badly you can beat someone without them dying?
That very last thing, "I'm just gonna leave that there."
I got it!
"atheism is a religion, because of your belief is that there is nothing to believe in" this is the shit i get during school, what do i respond to this idiotic stuff
Such nonsense doesn't deserve anything more than a good "shut the fuck up," but if you want to be all diplomatic and stuff, bring up the fact that you believe in probably most of the same things as your accuser, just not any gods. Give a proper definition of atheism, and if they just repeat themselves, walk away because they're not interested in discussion.
Read Peter Boghossian's book for a way to deal with this and many other questions.
www.amazon.com/Manual-Creating-Atheists-Peter-Boghossian/dp/1939578094
Memorize these:
Religion - belief in, worship of, or obedience to a divine being or beings considered to have control of human destiny.
Atheism - disbelief of the religious claim of the existence of a divine being or beings.
Then tell them to try using a dictionary.
If 'atheism' is a religion, then 'bald' is a haircut style and 'off' is a TV channel.
*****
see, this is the thing. By that definition of religion, Buddhism is not one.
You can't oppose atheism to religion for this reason; there are atheistic religions, and you can be theist and not be religious. I think any definition of religion that doesn't include a social aspect to it, is pretty useless.
The correct way to go about it is to oppose atheism to theism, not atheism and religion.
epic rant
Another poorly titled video excerpt.
Apparently the poster can't tell a 'rant' from an 'enlightened statement'.
How sad. I hope that will change...soon.
"I'm just gonna leave that there" LMFAO
i keep asking this on other videos as well, but no ones responded yet... but... can anyone explain how christians believe they derive morality from a god who didnt want man to even understand - much less obtain knowledge of - good and evil?
that tree of knowledge thing all the way back in the beginning, thats why people know good from evil, and why god condemned all of humankind (according to the bible heh)... so why is the question even asked of atheists how _they_ get their morals
It comes down to what Christians tend to say all the time. "I'm Blessed!" Their sanctimonious upbringing and mindset leads them to believe they're automatically 'morally' better than those who don't share their belief. It's also ignorance of the content of the book they like to thump in your face.
Everything was supposedly good in Eden. The humans probably didn't know it because the term "good" is only relative (to something worse). So when they ate the fruit, they only became aware of good because they were introduced to "not good."
"I distrust those people who know so well what god wants them to do, because I notice it always coincides with their own desires." --- Susan B. Anthony
Theists believe that we are printed-out by a god program with emotions that enable us to somehow pick-out, and properly evaluate, the "correct" text from ancient, obscure and often contradictory scriptures. This has proven to be a very unreliable way to move forward. (Witch trials much?)
Atheists believe that we evolved emotions that make us tend to care about others (but not always) and that we also evolved reason which enables us to create and evaluate social systems to compensate for the flaws in emotion (territorial/ aggression). They understand that the only way to formulate morality, is to carefully experiment with social systems until we can find ways to make complex civilizations work the way most of us want. This has shown to be the most reliable, but imperfect, way to move toward that goal. Mistakes have been made, but theists have no better way.
Either way, when opinions clash, those with the most power get to say how it goes. So far, contrary to popular belief, no evidence for meddling specters.
If a man sells his daughter to be a slave, she shall not go out free as the male slaves.
If a man smite his slave with a rod and he dies, he shall be punished, but if he lives a day or two, he shall not be punished because he is his money.
If a man smite the eye of his slave that it perish, he shall let him go free for his eye's sake.
They never give you a simple answer
What should be done is to force the theists to define indentured servitude and THEN show that is not what is specified by owning, harming and passing down slaves.
Indentured "servant hood"
Anybody else noticed that? He did it twice! 🤣
I love the indentured servitude argument. It is wrong on two points: 1. What the bible describes as slavery is slavery is NOT indentured servitude. 2. Christians think indentured servitude was like volunteering for a job. Indentured servants could be beaten, could be held in shackles, basically had no legal or human rights. Since their contract for servitude was legally binding, if they disobeyed their contract holder (master) or escaped, they could be imprisoned, or returned to the master for what ever punishment they saw fit. Also, more time could be added to their servitude. So, I love this idea that indentured servitude was just like volunteering for a job.
Slavery was probably worse in those days than American slavery
Where does matt get his morality from?
They should make "the Bible slavery experience"tv show as a spin off
Indentured servitude is the most fucking annoying argument
6:03 That was hilarious
Religious people believe that the bible is the authority for moral values. I raised two children without religion. They turned out to be respectful people. Moral values led to the creation of religions, not the other way around. Religious people are childish. They need guidance from an imaginary authority.
I submit and adhere to the scientific principle of Cause and Effect. That being said, what is Slavery? Who or what causes Slavery?
Slavery is owning a human being as property. Slavery is most likely caused by greed.
If God has agency and devised His/our moral code, then His morality must come from rationalising outcomes and consequences (as it can be demonstrated humans can and do more or less constantly), or God was always imbued with a very specific set of universally fixed morals, in which case where did He get them? This whole morality run-around is just the Unmoved Mover argument, but replacing 'first cause' with 'morals'.
Is there SOME WAY to get Matt Dillahunty to debate mr. rev Al sharpton....I was not satisfied with Sharptons dodgy verbage when he was debating Christopher Hitchens.
I just enjoy how Matt just zeros in and corners theists to the point they are just trying to pull anything out their ass.
Better yet watch the prince of egypt it lays out the tragedy of slavery quite clearly
The slavery issue perhaps more than any other reveals the moral contortions theists must practice to preserve the belief that they are going to heaven.
"KRONOS RULES"
I love how they made a slight rip on atheism plus and now they've bent over backwards for the feminist co-opting of atheism.
I love how fuck you.
haha good one
They have not bent backwards it’s you who’ve put them on a pedestal. When you find that you disagree with them on some issues, you want to tear them down because you’re biased.
fiot declaration?
There has been a long Christian history of horrible explanations of evil, wherein all blame is put on the victims. Disabled people, stillborn babies, the suffering of children and adults alike has all, from time to time, been explained as punishment for their sins. If not actual behaviour, then for thought crime, and, sometimes, the punishment itself is in order to prevent some serious sin happening in the future. The theory goes that God never punishes people through random bouts of suffering by accident: everything is part of God's plan. If suffering seems unjust and unfair, then, it is merely the case that God is judging and punishing people for reasons that their fellow Humans do not comprehend. Thoughts like these kill all sense of compassion and caring, and scupper any chance of granting relief to the victim. Everything is our fault: there is no suffering of innocents, for there are no innocents. It is not our job to try and alleviate the pain that God has seen fit to bring upon us!
I am sure that most modern, moral, readers, must react in horror to such an inhumane dismissal of evil. Many may even, through wishful thinking and ignorance, disclaim that no-one has held to such a monstrous justification. But you'd be wrong. We've seen it in the Jewish Story of Job in the Bible, where poor job has done nothing wrong, and God itself blasts down a warning that no-one may question God's judgements and methods. In the Jewish spiritual book, The Talmud, it said that 'if a man sees that painful suffering visits him, let him examine his conduct' and that 'there is no suffering without sin'13. In other words: blame the victim.
“Once you assume a creator and a plan, it makes humans objects in a cruel experiment whereby we are created to be sick and commanded to be well.”
Christopher Hitchens
Lawrence Krauss (2012)14
Christianity followed suit, and embraced the idea of original sin. That is, we all deserve punishment simply for being human, until such a time as we are saved, if we ever are. This was not mere philosophizing - the Christian church in the dark ages really did ban medicine and physicians on the grounds that our bodies deserve their pains and diseases. The same went for childbirth - it is painful and dangerous for women, because God made it that way as a punishment for all women15 (Genesis 3:14-19). Midwifery was banned. Their activities were seen as a "direct affront to the divinely ordained pain of childbirth" and, according to a Scottish clergyman, "vitiating the primal curse of women"16. For the same reasons, "when the great American discovery of anaesthetics was applied in obstetrical cases, it was discouraged [because] it was an impious attempt to escape from the curse denounced against all women in Genesis iii. 16" - Draper (1881)17, also told by Stanton (1898)18. Martin Luther, the founder of Protestantism, taught the same: The following statement epitomizes the Christian approach to female welfare: "If they become tired or even die", Luther wrote, "that does not matter. Let them die in childbirth - that is why they are there"19.
This outright dismissal of pain and suffering arises because religious theology cannot answer the fundamental question as to why there is evil and suffering in the world. The result is a morality that can have a profoundly negative effect on human compassion.
If this was the 1800's Matt would be a slave master..........
He sure owns all the callers.
When he hangs up on them like a coward......
Prophet he hangs up on them when he realises they are too braindead to understand his arguments. I totally understand where he is coming from.
Matt misses the greater naritive of the bible
Lol atheist actually read the Bible for what it is and don't lie for it in a way we're more religious than they are lol
A comment I've made before. The Theist has a Steam Powered Brain in a Nuclear/Solar Powered World. It's quaint, and cute. But out of date and obsolete.
XYL I think that is fair for indoctrinated theists, but it is also true for indoctrinated atheists, liberals, conservatives, social justice warriors, etc. They are all about regurgitation and surface level thinking rather than true thought. Matt himself exhibits that as he fails to deeply analyze and instead regurgitate the indoctrinated views.
Those who don't serve God today will ba a slave of the devil in hell. The Old testament was for the Jews at a certain time. When did Matt become Jewish. If it does not apply to him as an Atheist why is he wasting his breath!
3:50 slavery plus like athesim plus lol
Social Structures in Conflict With Bible Principles
By the time the Bible began to be written, humans had already established social structures and economic systems that conflicted with godly principles. While some of the practices involved were condemned in his written Law, God chose to tolerate others, such as slavery.
Regarding the social structure of the ancient nation of Israel, The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia states: “It was meant to function as a brotherhood in which, ideally, there were no poor [and there was] no exploitation of widows, waifs, or orphans.” Hence, more than simply allowing an already established social and economic structure, God’s Law regulated slavery so that, if practiced, slaves would be treated in a humane and loving manner.
Slavery in Bible History
Consider the following regulations included in the Law given through Moses:
● Kidnapping a man and then selling him was punishable by death. (Exodus 21:16) However, if despite all the provisions made to prevent poverty, an Israelite found himself deeply in debt, perhaps as a result of poor management, he could sell himself as a slave. In some cases he might even be able to earn a surplus by which he could redeem himself.-Leviticus 25:47-52.
● This was not the oppressive kind of slavery that has been common in many lands through the ages. Leviticus 25:39, 40 says: “In case your brother grows poor alongside you and he has to sell himself to you, you must not use him as a worker in slavish service. He should prove to be with you like a hired laborer, like a settler.” So this was a loving provision to care for Israel’s poorest.
● A person found guilty of stealing who was unable to make full restitution according to the Law could be sold as a slave and in this way pay off his debt. (Exodus 22:3) When he had worked off the debt, he could go free.
● Cruel and abusive slavery was not allowed under God’s Law to Israel. While masters were allowed to discipline their slaves, excesses were forbidden. A slave killed by his master was to be avenged. (Exodus 21:20) If the slave was maimed, losing a tooth or an eye, he was set free.-Exodus 21:26, 27.
● The maximum time that any Israelite would have to serve as a slave was six years. (Exodus 21:2) Hebrew slaves were set free in the seventh year of their service.
Matt is so tired and wrong with his argument. He takes Exodus 21 out of context.
Pre-Exodus Context
Slavery is said to have started because during evolution there were some humans who still were treated or looked at as animals. This is the root of slavery by most scientists.
Secular society had embraced slavery and the viewing of slaves as worthless.
The Jewish people experienced first hand the horrors of slavery and murder in Egypt.
Exodus 21
Exodus 21 begins the difficult path of changing how slaves are seen and treated. No longer were they seen as animals and they were seen as deserving a path to freedom. (If you want an analogy, look at gun control, do you go after all guns or the most dreadful ones first.). This is far from condoning slavery, it was changing and removing it over time.
Post Exodus
Finally Jesus’s statement that we treat all others like ourselves, completely ends slavery as an acceptable practice.
So when Matt talks about this, he fails to see the natural process of removing a very engrained secular society practice.
Ephesians 6: 5
5 Servants, be obedient to them that are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in singleness of your heart, as unto Christ;. Nice try.
James West so [edit] you have no dispute with what I said in Exodus, great then we’ve made progress. Now you have to learn not to cherry pick from the Bible. Placed into context
5 Servants, be obedient to them that are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in singleness of your heart, as unto Christ;
6 Not with eyeservice, as menpleasers; but as the servants of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart;
7 With good will doing service, as to the Lord, and not to men:
You see how verse 6 and 7 are not talking about serving to please men, but serving to do the work of the lord. This; therefore, isn’t about slavery at all but serving the lord. Nice try.
T Jones I've read the Bible several times cover to cover and studied it. Please provide context that justifies this verse.
James West you didn’t give a new verse.
Ephesians 6: 5
Wow! There sure are a lot of anti-Christian bigots commenting.
There's nothing like a good old ad hominem, because demonizing your opponents is easier than responding to their points