Dope Tech Episode 2

<<@CrossExamined says : De Impact Apologetics: FREE Download fo the sermon I Don't Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist!: 👉📱https://cutt.ly/cInI1eo>> <<@RandyEscalanteGarcia says : I was in the same shoes as that young lady years back. Writing major and all, took tons of philosophy classes and addressed this same topic and morem Frank nailed it. And as a Christian, it's amazing what God reveals to us in our walk as we grow and understand His word and who is, that makes these philosophies fold like lawn chairs. Humble lady.>> <<@LilacDaisy2 says : Wow, wow, wow!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!>> <<@dmytrodoncov5996 says : No, it doesn't prove the opposite actually. For sure, it doesn't prove that the source of morality of the people is within the Bible. These "hard problems", like killing, comes from human nature. This is why there is no such thing in that case as dilemma if life has value, the same apply to animals, which has altruistic behaviors. Non-universal aspects of morality shows that it does evolve by time, even you admitted that The Old Testament ( part do the God's words) doesn't apply to Christians nowadays, unless it's repeated in the New Testament. If Morality does evolve by the time and differs partly in every culture, then it suggests us that there is no such thing as the law of morality, which would has a rank of laws od physics.>> <<@NewCreationInChrist896 says : Revelation 21:8 But the cowardly, unbelieving, abominable, murderers, sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars shall have their part in the lake which burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death.”>> <<@mrarcade2504 says : Check out inspiring philosophy’s series on virtue ethics. He has a few videos on it>> <<@guitarplyr327 says : Morality is subjective. There is no objective morality. Period.>> <<@Foxygrandpa2131 says : It baffles me that this is a controversial topic. By definition morality must be objective. Otherwise it wouldn’t be a standard.>> <<@jaz_shl says : Cultural differences prove the diversity of morals. Imaging us living in the ancient times, with no contact with others or knowledge about others, and we were doing what we saw our ancestors were doing (whether we wanted to or not, and there will still be people who would question that too), and we thought that that was right and that was the truth, and we continued with our lives with still no contact with others. Then, moral relativism would have been true. It is because of human actions (like alliances, battles, colonisation, trade etc) that contact and knowledge began to mix freely, adopted and discarded, and even lost forever. We are constantly trying and devising methods to improve our lives and wellbeing, and lessen our suffering, and that we have managed to elevate our standards of living is what prompts us to have an opinion on the actions of earlier people. How do we opine what people did back then was right or wrong? Based on our living standards and views. There are people who live bodily in this century but could be following a belief or practise which came into being 2000 or 1500 year back. As the standards of living rise even more drastically as time goes on, our moral standards will change. But it will and should always aim at improving wellbeing and lessening suffering.>> <<@rplayer3846 says : For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. John 3:16 NKJV>> <<@Powerful9315 says : this is awesome!!>> <<@keyman6689 says : I love this. Take it a step higher. Cultural differences can point to the same moral absolute. What's the broader context? Great point.>> <<@dixonbuttes says : That was really good!>> <<@jabberjaw1067 says : Putin isn't causing division. Stay out of politics. Ukraine is an ungodly nation and I believe God is using Putin to judge them. Just wait n watch. There r Nazis there, they are doing horrible things to their Russian brothers n prostitution is legal. Watch>> <<@mattdavis4701 says : I would suggest on the life raft rock paper scissors. Best two out of threes. I would like to say I would offer myself. I lived a good one seen a lot. Also a good swimmer. Could ask em to come back for me. Oooooo better idea. One person at a time takes there turn being a human engine pushing the boat.>> <<@thinkingandwondering4725 says : 4:00 Thats the point. The dead does matter. And yes. So the Lession is wrong, not the answer. Frank Turek isn't as good as John Lennox or William Lane Craigh, but he is true in these.>> <<@mattk6719 says : Imagine yourself on a river, white-water rafting with 3 friends. Along the way, the two steering with the oars became convinced that the oars were slowing down the raft and that throwing them away was the right decision to speed up your progress. After that, as the waters get rougher, they talked and voted that everyone should cast away their life-vests and helmets, to lighten the load of the raft so you don't sink. One has decided to jump into the water to help push the raft faster, but struck a rock and died. The two remaining blame you for continuing to wear your helmet and life vest and demand you remove them, blaming your non-compliance for the roughness of the rapids and death of the one who jumped overboard. They tell you it's for the greater good of th boat as they decide to further lighten the load of the raft by knifing holes in it to release all the unnecessary air trapped inside. Who is right? What do you do?>> <<@alienpick1 says : Jesus Christ is Lord ✝️ Maranatha>> <<@sarahdean1954 says : Ritualistic cannibalism is the not the right answer to that question because it can spread disease, as seen in one of the last cultures that practices it spreading a brain eating disease specifically by that practice. spreading disease is not an acceptable way to honor the dead.>> <<@andrewstidham7950 says : Jesus said there is NONE good.. ppl just don't understand what happened in the garden do they. Our traditions our ways are meaningless to God he wants us to know him in spirit and truth Jesus said that himself. God changes NOT he is the same today yesterday and FOREVER! you begin to know him seriously and ALL of who you are becomes obsolete. ALL OF YOU. Your ways your life your mind YOU IN GENRAL. our righteousness is as filthy RAGS. meaning anything about us without Jesus is for NAUGHT. it isn't hard to understand that if you truly want to. And there in lies the problem.... DO WE! truly want to understand God.. humanity drives me crazy with their ignorance concerning God. He isn't hiding from us he is more then willing to show us right from wrong he tells us basically in his word. And will show you personally if you still can't grasp his word. He is ever merciful and full of grace I can attest to that personally. And shows me constantly how all the world wonders around aimlessly cause they refuse to acknowledge him trying to figure it all out. WELL WE CAN'T REALLY! it just blows my mind the arrogance we can have. We better learn to humble ourselves cause he will humble you if you are not careful.>> <<@danielcristancho3524 says : I can see how this could work from the world's perspective but it cannot work from a Christian perspective. Always, the Christian works from the perspective of a "thus saith the Lord". Not all cultural practices conform to the truth of the Bible and that's what counts to the Christian. The Bible does not conform to our culture, our culture must conform to the Bible IF you claim to be a Christian. And that's a BIG 'IF'. Many label themselves Christian but deny it by their actions/lifestyle. That's why there is no such thing as a Christian cannibal, a Christian voodoo practioner, Christian hookups, Christian strip shows, Christian bars, etc. As Peter states, "We ought to obey God rather than man.">> <<@nathanm.8823 says : "But I want to sin without feeling guilty though." Can we acknowledge that this is what she's really saying? Also to suggest that something being culturally acceptable means it's okay to do, is to say God doesn't make the rules, man does. So frustrating.>> <<@teddyrascal6305 says : relativism, at best, can only be relatively true, and is therefore a self cancelling belief.>> <<@generalleigh7387 says : God’s Word is truth- including the 4th Commandment that is still binding contrary to the ACTS of the Catholic Church circa 1798 “to change times and laws” in fulfillment of Daniel. Repent.>> <<@callaelwell9741 says : I wonder if this same thing applies to modesty (particularly head coverings), something Frank talked about a while ago and had tons of people disagree with him on.>> <<@waitstill7091 says : If it's all about the gospel of Jesus, why the need for a new religion, apart from Judaism?>> <<@nastyHarry says : So murdering innocent people is objectively evil? You mean like when God killed David and Bathsheba's innocent child?>> <<@CLCinflorida says : You ask for Volunteers, if no one steps up, you Draw Straws... 👍>> <<@gloryebangon1413 says : So according to you guys, people in Africa walk about half naked, still looking as primitive as in the 18th century? How do you put pictures of modern Arabs, modern westerners, yet ancient Africans? Why is the west so bent on painting a very dark picture of Africa?>> <<@archelinuxe2447 says : Why do you censor that woman with bare breasts? To that tribal society, women with bare breasts are perfectly normal. Men see them regularly so they're desensitized & have no erection to it.>> <<@somerandom3247 says : Morality is subjective. Based on feelings and opinions. There are no objective moral facts. Even if you ask someone who believes they are objective, they offer a subjective basis for their morals. If you feel that I'm wrong, please offer an objective moral fact and the basis that makes it objective.>> <<@somerandom3247 says : No, but it does prove wrong the notion that a god has written a moral code on all our hearts. Endless your god is a dock and thought it would be funny to give everyone different morals.>> <<@uolocur9356 says : Hmm. People not wanting to die and trying to minimize damage dosent mean life is inherently valuable. People who are in a life or death self defense situation kill because they need to survive. It benefits the species to conserve as much life as possible>> <<@archelinuxe2447 says : Holy kiss? That's disgusting. 🤮>> <<@sierraclark6129 says : “If you declare with your mouth “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved” (Romans 10:9). Now is the time to accept Jesus as your personal Lord and Savior. Obey His commands and repent of your sins because Jesus is coming back soon. Tomorrow isn’t promised.>> <<@reynaldodavid2913Jo says : I don't think there is any verse in the bible to honor the dead, therefore there is mo immorality whatever you do with your dead.. We honor our dead because we love them, But there is no commandment of God to honor our dead.. So we do not commit sin if we do not honor our dead...>> <<@hansdemos6510 says : It seems to me that people everywhere tend to honor their dead because they are human, not because there is a deity telling them to. I think some moral guidelines follow from the facts of life, from the mere fact that we are alive, that we need sustenance and shelter, and that we are social mammals. That does not make these guidelines "absolute", but it does make them as "objective" as we can possibly get without any need for a "god". It is therefore a mystery to me why people like Dr. Turek seem to think that a deity of some sort is needed to have "objective" morality, or how he could claim to know any morals that originated from such a deity, if it existed.>> <<@BLAM777 says : Actually we do murder the innocent, the left calls it abortion.>> <<@morlewen7218 says : Torturing babies for fun is evil. Woulf it be good without having fun? Is drowning babies always sometimes or never good? How about burning them alive? Always evil or sometimes good? If you are contra moral relativism are you pro moral absolutism?>> <<@Godlimate says : What’s this idea about morality having objective properties? Why is it so hard for people to understand that morality is a human invented construct for social utility? And I don’t think people understand what subjectivity is: we are subjects of influence, and so there is no objective moral principle if the foundation of thought relies on the influence of our localised institutions. And I also think people don’t understand the function of objectivity: that it is incontestable. This idea that killing babies for fun is objectively immoral is nonsense because it is and has been contested. You people who make this claim just don’t do enough research that there are people out there who think this is fun, and because they are part of the moral calculus, it is far from objective. The fact that morality is invented by humans is in itself evidence that it can never have any objective position. It frustrates me even more when people don’t understand subjectivity in the bible and that we somehow take ourselves away from the fact that it was written by men whose influences were limited to their local surroundings at a certain period. It’s incredibly transparent and also obvious that it was designed to entertain us with fairy tale narratives next to a Harry Potter book.>> <<@austinford4085 says : Objective Morallity does not equal value of human life. You can desire to safe a human's life without believing there is an objective moral responsibility to do so. Using your logic would mean saving my kitchen chair would also be a moral dilemma because I value such chair. But it isn't, and for the same reasons valuing a human life doesn't make morality objective.>> <<@cygnusustus says : Honoring the dead is not a moral absolute. Frank is truly deluded.>> <<@Kevin-lw2gl says : Easy way how I explain this is something like this: What can you make with a tomato? You make tomato sauce for a pizza, tomato soup, blend it in spicy salsa, make a tomato paste, you can eat it with a salad, prepare curry, chop it up and mix it with other ingredients...we can do many things with a tomato. BUT, it doesn't matter how you present it, it will continue to be a tomato as the standard. I can show my devotion to God in many ways through prayer, fasting, music, art, scripture, charity, praise, etc. But God is still my standard. One must understand why we feel uneasy when we know we do something wrong or something that we consider to be unethical. But objective morality has to be the standard, otherwise you end up creating a counterfeit for morality. You can't make tomato sauce with a carrot or an onion. You can find ways to mimic the taste of tomato, but it still won't be a tomato.>> <<@AleksAvramJeff says : For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood from His workmanship, so that men are without excuse. Romans 1:20. The Bible changed the world, Christians changed the world for the better the most, history showed that Jesus Christ is the most important historical figure ever. Reject Him, and you won't have an excuse later on.>> <<@noelcurtis5439 says : I love these short videos, love the long ones too 😁👍🏼🙏🏼>> <<@scottkunghadrengsen2604 says : Cultural relativism in the Bible itself around the practice of slavery>> <<@Dhavroch says : Moral truth is there, but because we are finite beings, we interpret it differently due to our historical, social and cultural contexts. You could say this is a compatibilist position , philosophically.>> <<@followerofchrist2627 says : Proverbs 16:3>> <<@kevinwesterville2115 says : The Bible is very immoral. God is a blood thirsty monster. Please read it.>> <<@superdog797 says : it's still not absolute. the values humans hold are genetically programmed into our bodies, literally. it's the same reason some sociopaths appear to be born without a value for other people's concerns. we don't value chicken lives much at all largely because we aren't genetically programmed to respond to chickens in that way, which just isn't the case with respect to other people. it's the same reason a shark doesn't value other lifeforms except its own and its offspring - it's genetic programming. this stuff isn't absolute, though it happens to be nearly universal across humans because of our genetic programming. frank wants to use the term absolute so he can sneak in an equivocation fallacy and assert that if morals are absolute there must be some physical or metaphysical basis they are grounded in which isn't limited to the sum total of individuals out there. unfortunately that's just a baseless assertion and we don't need it to explain our moral intuitions either.>>