• expired

Free Courses (Digital) @ Credo Courses


Audio and Video Courses

The Discipleship Program

The Resurrection of Jesus – Gary Habermas

Is God a Moral Monster? – with Paul Copan

Unplugged with Dan Wallace

The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus

Digital Video

Church History Boot Camp

FREE: Church History in 45 Minutes

History of the Church – with Justo Gonzalez

Digital Audio
The Historical Reliability of the Gospels – Craig Blomberg

Revelation – Mark Hitchcock

PowerPoint + Keynote
How to Study the Bible Boot Camp

Related Stores

Credo Courses
Credo Courses

closed Comments

  • +4

    Here we go again. I always doubt about this is a true deal or just marketing.

    • +3

      Look, Easter is coming and Christ is risen but their prices never rise!

    • -2

      You of little faith.

      • +1


        Wrong again.

        • Thou shall not useth ye

      • -2

        You of little faith.

        So quick to judge.

        • Quick to judge a joke.

  • -1

    religious content should be banned :(

    • +3

      or just anything you don't agree with?

      • +3

        hmm… than lets allow guns and drugs too. There is a line and seeing the comments below this "deal" is very divisive . You do not know me yet it took you half a second to judge me so is it really just me who is wrong that this stuff do no represent a "deal" within the spirit of this community? hmmm… :(

        • +1

          It depends if Guns and Drugs are legal in a country.

          If someone post a book on atheism and cause division. Should it be ban?

        • +1

          There is a line and seeing the comments below this "deal" is very divisive

          Probably the most ridiculous reason to ban something.

    • +2

      a person who is intolerant toward those holding different opinions.

      • +4

        One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ. What do most religions have to say about those who don't believe in their fiction? Sinners, infidels, heretics, etc. It's pretty hard to be religious and not a bigot.

        • +1

          Believers are sinners as well. And can have non-damnable heresies. I don't go around calling people those names. But even someone does it. Why do you care?

          • +3

            @gto21: Creating a punishment (hell) for not choosing to believe in fiction is a scare-tactic. Labeling those who do not follow the fictional rules as sinners is bigotry. Homosexuals go to hell, masturbators go to hell, adulterers go to hell, women who use anti-pregnancy methods go to hell, etc.

            • +4

              @kahn: You did not answer my question. I won't care if I was you. If I did not believe in God or hell. Why are you so worried about something you call fiction?

              I already mentioned believers are sinners as well.

              • +1

                @gto21: Beliefs do not exist in a vacuum. They shape our behaviour. It matters to all of us if people have inhumane and irrational beliefs.

                • @kahn: Here's an irrational belief. Many athiests believe that everything is created from nothing. Should we ban this belief?

                  • +1

                    @gto21: The big bang theory is explicitly labeled as a theory. Science doesn't seek to force itself on people, indoctrinate them while young, and create fictional punishments for those who choose not to believe.

                    • @kahn: Most people in Australia are not forced to believe in religion. Just don't believe in it if you don't want.

                      Young people are taught that everything is created from nothing at school.

                      • @gto21:

                        Most people in Australia are not forced to believe in religion

                        Thank god for that!

                        • +1

                          @kahn: Problem solved. You're welcome.

            • +1


              Creating a punishment (hell) for not choosing to believe in fiction is a scare-tactic.

              Can't find the meme about this right now. But why would anyone worry about going to place that they don't believe exists?

              Even if you are an atheist, don't you think it's good for the world that a divine being exists that would judge you for your actions whether or not someone see you do it, and whether or not you are punished by the law?

              Could think of it how Santa Claus is to kids, lol.

        • +2

          It's pretty hard to be religious and not a bigot.

          Atheism and religion have many things in common on what's right and wrong. Does atheism agree that every possible action is acceptable? If not, doesn't that make it just as hard to not be an atheist and a bigot?

          • -1

            @ozhunter: Atheism doesn't follow a list of unchangeable rules from centuries ago. It allows for progressive rules/laws based on human experience and empirical observations and allows critique and skepticism of bad ideas. It naturally allows for bigotry but doesn't preach it.

            • +1


              Atheism doesn't follow a list of unchangeable rules from centuries ago. It allows for progressive rules/laws based on human experience and empirical observations

              Sounds like these rules can be whatever someone wants them to be? Is there a list of these rules of what is right and wrong? Who decides?

              Do we at least agree that if something is legally acceptable does not mean that it is also morally acceptable?

              allows critique and skepticism of bad ideas.

              Christianity allows for this. It hasn't always been the same. Why do you think there are so many denominations? lol

              It naturally allows for bigotry but doesn't preach it.

              When you say "preach it" are you saying atheists can't inform others of what they think is morally acceptable?

              • @ozhunter: Geez, what's with all the questions? Atheism is simply not believing in a god/creator. This usually includes a rejection of many of the concepts based on faith that religions proclaim. If you want to extend that definition and its implications further, then please take one of the atheist courses that gto21 recommends.

                • @kahn: Since you admit that atheism does not follow a list of rules, you end up proving we can't have a standard of morality with atheism. It's just the opinion of one person compared to another.

                  Prostitution is legal in Australia. Do you have any problem if any female member of your family gets in the industry?

                  If bestiality becomes legal like in some other countries. Will you have any issue with any member of your family doing those practice?

                  • @gto21: Whether or not issues like those are governed by enforceable laws would be based on community standards which would (hopefully) be based on balancing the possibility of harm versus civil liberties. Laws and attitudes can change over time with the improvement of human understanding, but religions are often barriers to such progress.

                    • @kahn: I gave you two examples of so-called progress. You did not answer both questions.

                      Individuals, laws and governments can't be the standard of morality. That's why you did not answer the questions. Because for you it's wrong. However, it's completely fine for others. It's one person opinion against another individual.

                      So all the morality your preaching can be wrong in your own worldview. So why anyone should listen to you?

                      • @gto21: Morality is a human concept, not an imaginary deity's. WE decide what is moral and immoral, just like the PEOPLE who created the religions. One of the differences between theists and atheists is the former usually bases morality on the wisdom (or lack thereof) from centuries ago and set it in stone by attributing it to an unaccountable, unquestionable imaginary deity.

                        • @kahn: If morality is a human concept. Tell us who or what is the standard of morality in your worldview?

                          Who are "WE"? I already prove individuals and government can't be the standard of morality. Even you admit rules change. If it changes it's not a standard of morality.

                          Ok since you used the word "WE". Can you now answer the question I've asked before regarding prostitution and bestiality? Or will you divert and not answer again?

                          • -1


                            Tell us who or what is the standard of morality in your worldview?

                            Humans. They create gods, they create morality, they create laws, they create punishments. It's all humans. And no, I'm not discussing your hobbies.

                            • @kahn: And yet you can't answer two simple questions. Legalised prostitution and bestiality are from human, you had many chances to answer those two questions. Your failure to answer is evidence of inconsistency in your worldview. I can't take advice from people who can't determine right and wrong in his own worldview.

                • @kahn: Questions are because you said "It's pretty hard to be religious and not a bigot." Because we have different opinions of a few main core issues. So you're statement should just equally apply to atheists.

                  • @ozhunter: I don't agree. Theism is a creation of humans. It creates belief and division. If there were no religions then that would be one less thing that would divide us. Atheism isn't a creation, it is disbelief of a fantasy (theism).

                    • @kahn:

                      It creates belief and division.

                      You could say just as well say that it's an atheist's beliefs cause division.

                      If there were no religions then that would be one less thing that would divide us.

                      That could be said for anything. If everyone followed Christianity, there would be a lot less division.

                      You basically associate bigotry with anyone who has religious beliefs because they are different from your own. Your moral compass is correct and everyone else is wrong.

                      • -1

                        @ozhunter: Having these discussions on the internet with the introduction of false statements, hyperbole, and assumptions is a tiring and frustrating experience. Perhaps you can continue such a debate with an atheist in-person.

                        • @kahn: I do, and it's just as tiring and frustrating too, lol. But also can be enjoyable at the same time :D

                          (I didn't neg you)

      • exactly, back at you mate :( read my comment above :(

  • -1

    What?! How could you not include The Catholic Boat?

    • +3

      You will need to subscribe to Pedo courses, it's not on Credo courses.

      Apologize to Catholic, it was a joke. I don't believe every Catholic is the same because of the action of a few.

  • +7

    Promotes dangerous thinking - no deal, even when free.

  • +5

    Wilfully indoctrinating people with a book that recommends executing gay people. Go away.

    • -4

      Are you for bestiality as well? If no harm is caused to people or the animal? If you don't know it's legal in some countries. If you're against bestiality, tell us why not?

      every sin lead to death. Christian is saved by grace, not by deeds. So it's every sin, not just the one you mentioned

      • So…you're saying that unless one accepts that all of Christianity is true then they must be pro-bestiality? That's not how logic works.

        • -4

          It's not what I wrote. If you want to talk about logic that's call a strawman argument - a logical fallacy.

          I think if he wants to be consistent in his worldview he will have to accept both. If he rejects one, his worldview will be inconsistent.

          He can reject it. That's not my argument.

          • @gto21: Unlike the straw man who approves of bestiality and is therefore wrong about their opposition to advocating the murder of gay people

              • +2

                @gto21: gto, YOU were the one making a straw man argument when you replied with your nonsense about bestiality to the original comment about execution.

                If YOU'RE going to lecture OTHERS about logical fallacies and straw man arguments, it might first help for YOU to understand what THEY are.

                The last thing the world needs is yet ANOTHER hypocritical Christian, and you sure as f**k aren't demonstrating christ's love by name-calling others "pro-sodomite activists".

                No one cares about your yet-to-be given "argument" because you lose any semblance of credibility and authority by the appalling manner in which you treat others, and that's before you start making ridiculous claims.

    • +1

      Does it? Which verse?

  • -1

    You know the deal. You know what's up.

    If somehow you don't, see the other negs.

  • Is God a Moral Monster? – with Paul Copan

    Thanks OP, I'm actually interested in this one though I know the answer :D

    • You're welcome. You made some good arguments in the comments above. I don't usually interact with atheists on those topics. Thanks to ozbargain I'm getting better at it. I'm more used to discuss/debate with another theist usually unitarians.

Login or Join to leave a comment