Re Andy Stanley's Atheism 2.0 (blocked)

https://www.facebook.com/AndyStanleyOfficial/posts/1945768362395011?comment_id=1948015758836938&comment_tracking=%7B%22tn%22%3A%22R%22%7D
Atheism 2.0 (first aired 2017?! where?): Atheism (not "ethiysm") isn't a belief system. That is, "I don't believe in God [sic]." isn't a belief; "I believe there isn't a god." is, however. Which is why it's important to distinguish atheism, which everyone is born with and which lasts for some until theòry of mind develops during toddlerhood when one injects personhood onto causes even if they don't talk back, with antitheism [whether agnostic or gnostic].

Agenda is plural.

Again, this country's citizens were never Kristian/didn't ever believe in Kristism. They're Paulists/Papists/Petrists. They continue to marry and breed and mate and earn in opposition to the Gospels.

There are no illusions, only delusions. Whether there is person, mind, or value is only semantics.

Free will has nothing to do with Scripture either, refuted by the passages on good and bad trees and fruit, curse of the fig tree, condemnation of other sects, ten minas, and doomsday, and refuted in reality by the readiness potential that determines motor cortical decisions. Decisions do not make choosing free; they're only as good as the mind. A sociopath with a shallow orbitofrontal cortex cannot understand what empaths can.

Anyone who says that everything came from nothing (or no thing) is wrong. It's the same false premise and maybe communication disorder as your premise of atheism. Everything can't come from anything; otherwise it'd not be everything. What's north of the north pole? You want someone to explain cosmoghony? That is, "The Origin of Cosmos"? like Darwin did for "The Origin of Species". Here it is: the gravity of positive and negative matter expanded and contracted opposites of the univers, caused inflation and the Hubble flow, in runaway motion equivalent to NASA BPP's diametric drive. Matter also grew whereas antimatter shrank into the half-dark matter of neutrinos (a mesòn-leptòn compound) and the full-dark matter of neutralinos (hadronic matter fused below the Planck scale). Thus this imbalance let structure.

You also had a problem with one of the "New Atheists'" quotes, on complexity within life. I don't think you or many of those professionals understand what complexity means. Complexity is not in itself good or useful. A screen full of white noise is very complex. As is the mess left after a tornado. The perceptions like seeing and feeling depend on relatively simple arrangements of feedback. (If you want the extracorporeal details, google "quantum vibrations".) Disorder, entropy, complexity, diversity, propagation, information, evolution, speciation, cladoghenesis are all related and lead to each other. Life is thus more complex [or disorderly] than minerals but lesser than gases. The alternative of entropy is for all matter to be frozen into neat blocks, like atom with like atom.

You feel and hope for intelligent design, that life has intention or plan behind it and a direction. Like you regularly use god in the singular [and capital, even when Scripture in the original language doesn't], you also represent this direction etc. in the singular, but you didn't support that singularity. All of the multiple religions, gods, books, versions, codices, heretics don't seem to matter to you. But I'll wait for the later series's episodes to see if you explain those. If life had a single direction, as Scripture (for some sects, the earlier ones, not the Abrahamic sects invented within the last 400 years) premises, then man formerly had a lifespan of almost 1000 years then fell away from the garden of gods and trees with superpowers, gradually died earlier until the alleged age limit of 120 years; and allegedly this fall caused other species to suffer and die too, from carnivory and bad mutations. If life came from gods (under the popular premise), rather than that gods came from life (under my premise, from clear passages that the creator gods were afraid of the trees for their powers, so their powers must come from those trees, represented as fig and palm in related verses, two trees of man's invention by agriculture), then lifespans should continue to shrink when gods are absent. But studies of lifespan, crime, and religiosity between countries show the opposite. There also shouldn't be so many claims of lifespans beyond 120; Wikipedia has a big list of longevity claims, into the centuries. Even if you're not a YEC you should wonder about species that can liv for centuries like turtles, immortal jellyfish, and quaking aspen. Pando, from this country [of course not mentioned in Scripture], is 100,000.

About your Facebook post, I don't expect your book uses extrabiblical sources for first century events, at least for biblical events; you want to claim timeline and historicity; you'd better prove it. Acts and Epistles didn't even keep time and corroboration. Nor do I expect you to talk about why Jews didn't believe in him but in Elijah. Nor that a three-day resurrection, after a suspect soaked sponge, when no tomb guards could report on it, and a promise of the soon endtimes within 21, 40, and 60 years, was supposed to be both divine and relevant to man's indefinite death and rotting, when doctors regularly resurrect (or resuscitate) folk today, Haitian zombis who took tetrodotoxin could die and come back after three days, and a Japanese hiker fell in the snow for 24 days and came back to life.