Theist Caller Can't Handle BASIC Questions, Dodges and Deflects | Matt Dillahunty & Eve was Framed
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 18 ก.ย. 2024
- Original Episode Here: www.youtube.co...
Matt and Eve field a call from long-time listener Tom, who wants to discuss his belief in God and the universe's origins. Tom points to the cosmological argument and brushes with the supernatural as his reasons. But the conversation takes a tense turn when Matt digs into Tom's claim that the timing of the universe's beginning suggests intentional creation. Tom struggles to address the question directly. Matt provides examples of how an event's timing (like when a fire starts) doesn't inherently show intentionality. As Tom still resists conceding the point, an exasperated Matt accuses him of dishonesty and abruptly ends the call.
SUPPORT THE NETWORK
---------------------------------------------------
Patreon: / calltheline
Become a Channel Member:
SUPPORT PRODUCTION
---------------------------------------------------
Paypal: www.paypal.me/...
Cashapp: cash.app/$jimm...
Amazon Wishlist: www.amazon.com...
MORE LIVE SHOWS & CLIPS
---------------------------------------------------
/ @callthelinex
CONTACT US
---------------------------------------------------
contact@qnaline.com
HOSTS
---------------------------------------------------
Jimmy Snow: @JimmySnow
Matt Dillahunty: @SansDeity
Arden Hart: / theardenhart
Katy Montgomerie: @KatyMontgomerie
Forrest Valkai: @RenegadeScienceTeacher
Dr. Ben: @FamilyDrBen
Aron Ra: @AronRa
Shannon Q: @ShannonQ
John Gleason: @godlessengineer
Erika: @GutsickGibbon
Eve Was Framed: / eve_wasframed
Paulogia: @paulogia
Alyssa Ljub: @AlyssaLjub
Eric: @skepticsandscoundrels
Dr. Aaron Adair
ADDRESS
---------------------------------------------------
The Line
110 N Interstate 35
Suite 315-1027
Round Rock, TX 78681
United States
SHOWS ON THE LINE
---------------------------------------------------
Sundays: The Sunday Show
Monday: Skeptalk
Tuesday: Chewed Gum
Wednesday: The Hang Up
Thursday: The Trans Atlantic Call In Show (TACIS)
Friday: Debates and Bonus Shows!
Look out for “HOSTility” and “Cus I Wanna” any day, any time
#CallTheLine
![HIWWHEE | OHM [Official MV]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/OJJLtTLqLag/mqdefault.jpg)
When an Apologist has so much invested in what he thinks is his killer argument, he will lie and shred logic rather than admit that his argument is garbage.
It's all psychological.
worse than that, he thinks he should call an atheist show
@@user-cg2ij7ow5uThe OP said nothing about multiple universes.
@@boblangford5514it's a bot
If this 'god' existed, it wouldn't need apologists.
I'm beginning to think that not listening and answering questions is a prerequisite for being a Theist.
You can stop thinking about it, it's true.
When they don't have facts and evidence that's all they have.
I'm beginning to think you're right
I'm certain you are correct.
The Donald Trump method. Hear a question and answer around it
One questions Theists CAN’T answer! You’ll be SHOCKED at what it is!
“Yes or no?”
"Well it depends, you see..."
It depends on what you mean by “Yes”. Is it the rock band?…😅
Lol@@shyjy6241
@l-_-lShadowCat Yes!.
@@l-_-lShadowCat -The revealing science of god. - YES. It's a pretty good song.
> "Hi Matt I've been watching your stuff for ten years"
Matt: "I have a _yes or no_ question for you"
> "uh oh"
Yeah, you'd think that someone who'd been watching Matt for a decade would know better. 🤣😂
I love how theists can't stop lying when they are backed into a corner. Those morals just evaporate whenever it is necessary. Behold, the power of faith!
They have to…. Or go against their own beliefs with facts and that’s a big no!!!
People do crazy things when they're in love, even in a toxic relationship.
Theist: Facts??? HISSSSSS!!!!!
Group survival trumps morality, for most nonwhites at least
@@goldwhitedragon nonwhites? 🤣 You'll find this is a universal behaviour among humans, you r8hcist.
If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit
That would make a hilarious tattoo 😅
And it works. Now what?
@@goldwhitedragon what?
Kamala's bread and butter.
Bigger question: how in the world has this caller been watching Matt for at least 10 years and not learned the important points both for and against the Cosmological Argument and Intelligent Design?!
he hasn't, i think he meant the last time he watched mat was 10 years ago
Watching and listening are not necessarily correlated.
Reversing Kalam: Everything in the universe known to exist has a natural cause. The universe began to exist. Therefore, the universe has a natural cause.
arthur etc: I've been saying something similar for years. To get to their "Gods", they later depend on defining them as "immaterial", among other things, and asserting that they did not "begin to exist". I say you have to take that into account in the formulation of the Kalam.
Every material thing that began to exist has a material cause.
The universe is a material thing.
Therefore the universe had a material cause.
No "God" needed. This does not go down well.
@Nai61a I like it. How about this ... Nothing immaterial has ever been proven to exist. God is immaterial. Therefore, God does not exist.
@@arthurunknown8972 That's very interesting. It directly exposes the assumed conclusion - "God exists" - and the asserted attribute - "God is immaterial". Of course, you will be told that because something has not so far been shown to exist, does not mean that we can entirely rule it out. And there's the complication of phenomena that are "immaterial", but rooted in the material, like consciousness or love. Nonetheless, I think you've got the makings of a workable syllogism there. Maybe the conclusion could be: "Therefore, it is reasonable to suppose that 'God' does not exist," or something like that.
@Nai61a Since they assume gods exist, immaterial exists & everything had a cause [except their special pleading], none of which they have any evidence, I'm merely using their own flawed logic against them. If they follow actual logic & rationality, I'm happy to meet them there, as well, but they know that won't work out for them, so they insist on getting special logic rules while denying me the same liberal pleading format.
@@Nai61a However, we don't know that consciousness or love are anything but memes (in the original Dawkins sense, which is much more useful than the current one); in other words, the name and concept called "love" refers to bodily operations (including the brain's) that may actually greatly differ from person to person. They are, in fact, material because they arise from the interaction of material things - of one person with another, and of things within each individual body.
A dishonest theist?! I’m shocked, shocked I say!😑
I say good sir, are you disparaging this man's intellectual aptitude?
@@scruffylookingNerfherder5742There is so very little there to disparage.
It's not a fair comparison...
Because you've found a flaw in my belief system and I know it and I can't admit it
He has been watching for 10 years and still a theist?
Why is he bothering?
That claim doesn't make any sense, as an atheist I can't imagine watching a Christian call in show for 10 years. I'd have zero interest in doing that. It's baffling why they say that, particularly because I think it isn't true either.
Why is he so dishonest ?
How could you watch this and see 36000 people fail at proving any god exists yet still remain a believer 😂
Do you really believe what he said?
Keeping his enemies closer.
When Tom heard that argument from an apologist (because it clearly is not his idea) it made so much sense to him. Having one time to start the universe instead of any other means there is a consciousness to choose that time. God proven! He never thought that a simple yes-or-no question about starting a fire could reveal the flaw in that logic.
In a way this proves that simplicity and not complexity is the result of a higher intelligence, just an example of simple fire with yes or no answer debunked instantly his flawed reasoning!!!
Timing … any unstable isotope of an atom is conscious in choosing the time of its individual radioactive decay.
Therefore Schrödinger’s cat was consciously murdered (or saved) by the atom. The atom is the ruler over life and death. And created all we see in its image (everything ifs made out of atoms)! We call that “God”, right?
Never mind that even the concept of time is meaningless before the universe began; as time, like space, is intrinsically part of the universe. For all we know, “cause and effect” outside the universe is not a thing.
And assuming there is something like time outside the universe and some conscious being did choose the timing of the creation of our universe … we would still be at the same point in time in our universe, no matter “when” it was started in relation to … whatever there is outside the universe. Our in-universe timeline is not changed by out of universe events. Think of it as a video game. The level starts at a point of your choosing, and you can pause, save, reload years later or even return to an earlier save game… but the characters in the game perceive nothing of this time manipulation, for them time is regular and steady and strictly monotonic.
Stalling, deflecting, dishonesty and wilful ignorance are all tools of Apologetics.
Hey, not everyone has the privilege of proper kindergarten education. For example about ... TIME.
These religious nuts always have a different curriculum than sane people. Like those criminal cases, we hear after some time in the media ...
Alt title: Caller tries to butter up Matt; gets toasted.
"Things have physical properties that interact with one another in consistent manners, therefore GAAAAWWWWWD."
This is next level stupidity
Agreed. What amazes me after listening to these calls for a few years is how the theists repeat the same exhausted and not compelling arguments like the Kalam over and over and over again (many of them seem to think they are making a new argument), and they always fail when the weaknesses are presented to them. Honestly it’s depressing how flimsy their reasons are for believing in a system that promotes what laws they support, what medical care they support, how they view the role of science, how they relate to others, where/if they marry, how they treat and educate their children, etc. So many of them just accept a belief system without looking at it clearly and critically…terrifying.
In fact it is just the same bs every theist does every and all the time.
I disagree; I think it's the same level of stupidity we've seen a million times.
Jesus Christ is the cornerstone of our faith, the Savior who offers hope to the hopeless and life to the lifeless. He's the light in the darkness, the one who left heaven to walk among us, to carry our burdens, and to pay the ultimate price for our redemption. His love is not just a concept, it's a reality proven on the cross and confirmed in the empty tomb. Jesus ain't just a teacher or a prophet, He's the Son of God, the Lord, the one who holds the keys to eternal life. in Him, we find forgiveness for our past, strength for today, and a glorious future. He calls each of us to follow Him, to trust Him, and to live out the purpose He has set before us. no matter where you’ve been or what you’ve done, Jesus stands with open arms, ready to welcome you into His kingdom. trust in Him, for He is the way, the truth, and the life, and through Him, we find our true identity and our ultimate destiny. Christ is King👑☦️
@@samiraabuser This is also next level stupidity.
I'm drinking a shot every time the caller says "RIGHT". I don't think I will survive.
I have noticed it's become more and more pervasive in American culture. I notice it the most in professionals/office workers, but also people who are on social media a lot
The other common word that everyone says too much is "perfect".
At least he’s not saying “like”, “literally” or “bro” over and over again. Those drive me nuts. Like literally, bro.
Notty u will receive ur punishment on judgement day😂🎉😂😅
@@michaelbeavis2632I had 2 laff at my broad Scottish dad start saying "Innit"
When listening to these back I often hear people say "From my perspective" and nothing important ever comes after that. If it's only something from your own perspective then it's not objective, and it can't be passed on to others easily because it's a subjective experience. I hear callers say those words all the time as if this qualifier somehow makes things work for everyone.
Perspective is very important when it comes to the arts, values and understanding facts. Not for establishing them though.
Hypocrites, they only accept personal experience if its points towards their god/belive.
@@Nava9380belief *.
It's like the people who say "this is my truth"
From my point of view the Jedi are evil.;
This caller is utterly hopeless.
So the caller is convinced that the universe had some intelligent entity that caused it to exist.
Just one, then?
How can you conclude that the universe was caused by only one intelligent entity? How can you look at the universe and eliminate the possibility of teamwork?
There can only be One Infinite.
@@deniss2623 Really? Prove it.
And what makes you think it's infinite in the first place?
Because monotheism.
@@Nava9380 What makes you think monotheism is correct?
@@deniss2623but we were made male AND female right? So if we are in gods image, shouldnt god be male AND female?
I've been watching Matt for a long time. I have rarely seen him get heated at anyone that's being honest and answering the questions they where asked
He's an arrogant bully with anger management issues. Last time I ever listen to him.
@@jameshenderson4876why is someone being a bully for getting upset with someone for not being honest or answering questions?
You won't be missed.
@@jameshenderson4876 this isn't an airport you don't need to announce your departure.
@@jameshenderson4876 Ha ha ha do you know how pathetic that sounds ! Could YOU listen to the same crap for 20 years day after day and keep your cool ?
There's no talking to certain people.
Absolutely but I also love it when the hosts realize that and at that point, stop the caller from just going on and on.
"It's hard to win an argument with a smart person, but it's damn near impossible to win an argument with a stupid person."
The reason they refuse to answer clearly is not because they don't understand, but because they sense on some level, that if they answer, the analogy will prove them wrong.
If they did not, they would walk right into the trap.
when they start evading, you know you've got them, because they are evading for a reason.
So, yeah, it’s a trap. Analogies always are. But if the analogy is sufficiently analogous, then the fact you’re in a trap is not the trapper’s fault.
He couldn't even be honest enough to concede that time has nothing to do with it and move on to a point that might make sense. That's some kind of defense mechanism spurred on by panic
16:13 i could not love Matt more than I do at this moment 😂😂😂😂😂
When you're life is literally a presupposition in the belief of a supernatural deity, honesty becomes a rare commodity.
Not only must there have been a loving Cause, the Cause had a long beard and a golden throne.
😂
Not only that, but this universe, which some will claim was created SOLELY for us, was created over 13 billion years ago and yet we were created a million years or so (or far less, however one wants to define "us"). So for 13,000,000,000 -1,000,000 years, god sat around, twiddling his thumbs waiting to put his plan in action?
PS - also this loving Cause had a penis.
@@johnnehrich9601 😆😂
Touch it, He doesn't.
Time for a pint in the pub, methinks. What a Wally !
Haha I'm with ya!.😅
I love the terminology, you sound fun to drink with, cheers!
My favourite way to read a book is in a pub garden with a book in one hand and a pint in the other.
It's always suspicious when someone says they investigated their faith to make it their own, and at the end of it they just confirm everything they already believed. Makes me think they didn't examine critically.
Kind of ironic that Tom posited the example of building a guitar cuz he subsequently got "shredded" by Matt
Building a guitar = great analogy for the universe 😊
Starting a fire = very unfair comparison 😮
"The whole universe, is a giant guitar." - Todd Rundgren. 😜 "The last of the new wave riders."
I built a guitar once 🤓
Building a guitar requires the pre-existence of all the different materials needed to make it. The ignition of a fire is a change in energy status. The guitar analogy to the start of the universe would require the pre-existence of components. The second analogy, a change in energy status, is more appropriate.
especially since one happens naturally , a fire, but the caller cant say yes to that because it destroys his whole arguement
It's string theory.
This is why he is a Theist. His inability to understand a simple basic Yes or No question. How could he ever deal with the other complex questions?
This is not true.
The reason they refuse to answer clearly is not because they don't understand, but because they sense on some level, that if they answer, the analogy will prove them wrong.
If they did not, they would walk right into the trap.
when they start evading, you know you've got them, because they are evading for a reason.
There is a simple solution to this problem. Every time Tom says "sure", someone poops in his mouth.
Thank you for the information very informative
Is stupidity and ignorance a prerequisite for being a theist?
Yes.
For Christan racists with facist proclivities!!!! Christian Nationlism/Nazism!!!!
Without a doudt!!!!
If ignorance is bliss, and religion in an opiate, then what?
@@mrflynn-v2x Opiates are pain relievers.
Now ask WHY someone needs the pain relief of a religion.
I have been watching Matt for a few (~ 5 years) now and love him and the entertainment he provides. But sometimes I genuienly fear for his health with how callers frustrate him. Its the same kind of selfish fear that I have when I think about my favorite sports stars retiring due to injury.
Chat was right to mock him.
If anyone can supply incontrovertible evidence for ANY supernatural phenomena, including ANY gods, I will pay that person $9,575 USD! No lie! Give it your best shot!
I checked Wiki's page on the "List of prizes for evidence of the paranormal" and I didn't see yours there. I call shenanigans.
(Point being: No reason to put down a hyperbole. There's a whole goddamn list of legit prizes for this)
So, your money is safe then!😂
I literally had anxiety listening to that stupidity from Tom, so dishonest.
when he mention guitar... i was like "there is the sneaky creator/designer presupposition"
It's also not created as Matt was saying. Just a rearrangement.
Thought this was going to be an interesting conversation about Tom's faith and his reasons for it but he just couldn't be honest about the simple point that renders his belief unjustified. Poor bloke, I do feel sorry for him as he's kidding himself. That level of cognitive dissonance must be literally painful.
Funny how they're always "not here to debate." Isn't that a telltale sign that they can't explain or justify what they believe and don't want to try?
Theists are so arrogant. Be humble like Jesus when you are wrong
Jesus was never wrong.
@@deniss2623 Except for when he was wrong, yeah. Totally.
@@deniss2623 Was?
@@deniss2623 Correct, he was never wrong because he never existed in the first place.
@deniss2623 really? Why didn't he know when fig trees are in season?
I completely accept the Kalam. Therefore natural forces in the cosmos caused the universe. No god needed.
you must be from barry town ?!
Premise 1 can be reasonably, tentatively accepted, but there’s no support at all for premise 2.
Premise 1 is a ridiculous thing to accept. It has literally no supporting evidence.
It equivocates examples of creation "ex materia" (from previously existing stuff) with creation "ex nihilo" (from nothing). The former is every example of anything "beginning to exist" that they will point to, but the latter is what they are arguing for. We have no examples of creation from nothing. In fact, to our understanding the act of "creating" requires you to actually affect some object that exists. It actually doesn't make sense to say I "created" something by acting upon nothing. You can't act on things that don't exist yet.
Secondly, they're just blatantly hiding special pleading in their language. It divides the universe into "things that began to exist," ie. everything; and "things that exist but never began to exist," ie. God. The first premise may as well be "everything except god has a cause" and the argument is logically identical.
The first premise alone is blatantly fallacious. I don't understand how people let it slide as reasonably acceptable.
@@Cyrinil142
Then you can explain the origin of the mass density of the singularity.
@@Leith_Crowther
You should get together with Cyrinil142.
Theists don't wanna know. They just wanna believe. And this caller is the personification of that.
Also the problem I see with the Kalam is that the premises aren't proven so even if the down stream logic leads to the conclusion that the universe was created it wouldn't matter because we don't know if everything is caused. The whole "Whatever begins to exist has a cause of its existence" is not yet proven. We don't know how or why many things came into existence. We also don't know that there are things that don't come into existence aside from we reject the concept of infinite regress.
Also, there's absolutely nothing wrong with an infinite causal regress.
Do a search for "Reversible Cellular Automata". These are mathematical constructs that have this infinite causal regress built in, and guess what, it's absolutely fine!
You can even play with them in your web browser!
Right any first cause argument is necessarily going to detail special pleading
Physics says that energy can't be created or destroyed, so I don't know why we should accept the first premise that it was created at some point. It's intuitive, perhaps, but our intuitions about physics are often wrong.
How is this for an alternative Kalam argument?
We can observe that everything that comes into existence is the result of energy and matter changing from one form to another in a natural way.
The Universe exists
The universe came into existence as a result of energy and matter changing its form in a natural way.
T0 is a descriptor we place at the beginning, there is no actual T0.
was looking through the comments if anyone else noticed. i think Matt might have missed that the caller believes T0 is an actual time! :D
For someone who has listened to this show for a long time, he seems to have zero idea of it works!!!
Im an agnostic/atheist and an eternalist. The moment to belive that everything had a beginning is when there is evidence for that. The big bang was so entirely disruptive that we don't yet know how to look beyond it, because "before it" might not make sense. We don't know.
My refrigerator stopped working at a given time, that implies intentionality. Therefore someone must have sabotaged my refrigerator.
9:33 "the fact of the matter
Well, the answer was clear: "Universe coming to existence imply intentionality because I want it so, and I say it, so must be". As usual.
Eve said it best: ANSWER THE YES OR NO QUESTION - you can try to move past it or move on to something else AFTER you acknowledge what's being said. You can't just scroll past the part where you answer a hard question for your position, that's some cult shit where you don't honestly confront when you're wrong so you can stay in the belief.
If the caller genuinely thought that the question needed more context (which in principle is perfectly valid) then I think he should have been allowed to say why.
Tom is clueless.
This is your brain on religion 💁🏼
yes, a 💩have more logic.
Dude was dishonest from the onset. Anytime anything happens, it happens a certain time. He's monopolizing the necessity of time in general as an indicator of creation.
Tom: Words mean exactly what I want them to mean.
There is an additional layer to this: WE as a species defined the the "beginning" of our universe as the moment 0. It is not anything more, then saying that a journey starts at mile 0...
Even if you grant this intelligent intentional cause, how does that get us to a God? (or in general, the supernatural). It could just be Goku - A super duper saiyan alien, couldnt it? Even if grant theists all of their BS premises, its still a big logical jump to say, therefore God.
@@sammur1977 Cool .. there exists a Goku (read: super duper powerful alien) that created everything in existence. Not sure why you had to add "apart from itself" .. itself creating itself is a logical contradiction. This God Goku seems entirely natural to me ... there is no need for connoting supernatural entities such as God(s).
As others have pointed out, anyone can play the absurd definition game. My point was that I can grant you whatever game rules you want to
play by (as long as the set of rules derive valid and sound conclusions) , and still never get to a supernatural God.
@@sammur1977who created god?
@@sammur1977 I have defined god as not existing, therefore god does not exist. See, two of us can play the definition game.
If he didn't create himself, who created him? Why is the creator a "him," anyway, a male human being in particular? What makes you think that that which made something from nothing was even sentient?
@@sammur1977 Cool story bro
Note to Matt - you really need to insert “GODDAMMIT” !!! Into your vocabulary 😂
Tom doesn't want to be backed in a corner with his fallacious argument, but is being so dishonest.
That was the longest intro ever, before the caller even touched at a reason for calling the show. You can tell that getting to the truth of things is not a priority for him. *EDIT* after listening to the full video, I rest my case.
Listening, using logic, and asking/answering questions leads to atheism, so Tom is the perfect believer. He avoids questions and logic like a champion.
The apologist could not be honest. It was like that scene in “liar liar” but the exact opposite.
love when Matt loses his temper 🤣
I nearly came in my pants with joyous laughter when you came back with the fire-starting argument :D
I was interested in hearing the reason he thought it was different. You are so fast to claim he is dishonest, although he doesn’t see himself as dishonest. He believes you just wouldn’t let him explain why this situation is different. I am interested in how people justify their beliefs, but we didn’t get there this time.
Politics and religion are based upon tribal instincts which aren't amenable to logic and reason. Using logic and reason doesn't address why he believes and he doesn't have the self-awareness to understand why he believes. Believers easily dismiss evidence and logic as they aren't the basis for their beliefs.
because you cant justify belief.
@@briannelson27 Interesting response. So, you dont think epistemology is useful? Or are you just trying to say you don't think the caller can justify his own beliefs? Personally I don't think he has "good" justification, but we never even got there.
@@bobs182 I can't say I disagree with your statement, however I still would have liked to hear his reasoning. Breaking down flawed epistemology seems more useful than the path this call took, at least for the listeners.
@@StormyTrina no unfalsifiable belief can be justified. Ever. There is no argument that can be made that can make them real. There is no physical thing to point to that proves any religion is real. No beliefs can ever be justified since they are not real.
You know you're a Christian when you can't ask a simple question because you're afraid of the answer.
I now believe in a God because mere evolution couldn't have generated such beauty as Matt's co host today😇
Chauvinist...are we?!
I accidentally shit my pants, but because my pants got shitty at a certain moment, that means i meant to shit my pants????
*too much information*
He's not dishonest, he's slow.
Actually both
13:20 "Thing came into existence, therefore it was intentional" with the example of a guitar.
Sorry, no Tom.
Let's say you're camping somewhere in the woods. Well, on a nice clearing, of course. Or a field. Or something.
Over night, it pours. Like buckets. The next day, when you get out of your tent, you see a puddle next to the tent.
It came into existence during the night.
How does that lead to it being *intentionally created there?*
Just a follow up.
I agree with your comment but here's an example of how a theist could respond.
"You intentionally pitched your tent there...Ergo it was intentional and a puddle was expected."
Lol...
Instead of assuming that fire is no different than the universe, you should have let the caller explain why he thinks it is different. I'm an atheist, but not listening to other people's reasons in a debate is very dishonest. Getting angry and shouting doesn't make you have better arguments.
Matt, don't know if you read comments, but I would love to see you do a segment on the biggest lie of Christianity- that salvation is a "gift". A gift does NOT require an eternity of servitude in exchange.
The entire point of salvation is for submission to the tribal/social group. Getting "saved" is joining, identifying with, and submitting to the group. Religion is all about groupism/tribalism. The servitude is to the group with God as the head of group identity. Religious metaphor at least subconsciously connects to tribal instincts.
If Tom really had watched Matt for years he should’ve known that was gonna happen lol
😂😂😂
i have no mouth, i can not scream...
I have no ears. What?
@@ZER0-- When I listen to a guy like this theist, I _wish_ I didn't have ears!
Good reference!
@@PriestApostate it is...
@@Graham-tm2jx What?
If god exists, if he didn’t have a beginning and created the universe, at what instant did he decide to create the universe, as measured on his own clock?…
(“Ah, screw this, I’ve been bored for too long; let’s make a Universe… uh, how long has this boredom been going on?…”)
I don't always understand your explanations, but this is a really simple and straightforward one!
"The door is green, the door is green, the door is green, my book says the door is green"
- but when I paint it red, it isn't green anymore, is it?
"well... if somebody... I mean... has the cones in their eyes swapped... or something... the door is still green... because the book says the door is green"
These people just can't answer honestly, there is a blockage in their mind from admitting they're wrong.
The ACA appears to hold the position that religiosity is not a mental illness. But I'm pretty sure I've heard hosts tell callers, in so many words, that there's a problem with their brains.
Well... isn't that the same thing?
This guy sounds suspiciously like Billy, an infrequent caller who is normally very rude and dishonest.
Did time exist, before the universe came into being? If so, how would we know this?
Time is a tricky concept. but the start of the universe must be the start until we can go beyond that
@@gowdsake7103 the caller stated(basically),that the universe was created at an intentionally specific time. in his scenario, time would exist at the moment of "creation", and assumably right before said event. when in fact, time did not exist before that point.
assumably? 🤨
There's intention behind the universe because guitar.
Dude is dodging questions like jordan peterson
Damn not me having sensory overload and ticcing from people talking at the same time 😅 Still worth it!!!
Is Tom a sincere believer? Yes I believe he thinks he is a sincere believer. Sincere believers, in order to maintain their sincere beliefs have to argue dishonestly. If they are honest with themselves they would no longer be sincere believers. Sincere belief does not mix well with truth and honesty from what I've seen.
I died before he eventually asked his question.
I'm a real human.
Proof it!
I don't believe you.
@@Nava9380 I'm a real human.
That's exactly what a robot would say.
@@mana3735*bites leg*👀
There was no time before the big bang as far as we can tell. So how was there timing involved in its creation? There are many things that exist that we can not trace to any intelligence. If a lightning strike starts a fire does that mean lightning is conscious? I think this guy is really a watch maker guy. He thinks a universe as we now see it is complex and most complex constructed things we see were all man made so God!
"Matt I used to listen to your show way back in the day... I think in college."
Matt: That's long enough
I believe the caller was trying to say “the fact that the universe began at a point in time rather than always having existed suggests there was a creator”
Of course this doesn’t follow either.
But the caller presented it as though the specific point in time was significant (as opposed to some other time) and Matt spent all that time trying to debunk this misunderstanding the caller created, meanwhile the caller didn’t realize what was happening.
Matt was responding precisely to what the caller said, which is fine, but more intuition would serve him better here.
Yeah, I think the caller was trying a very tortured version of the old "there is something rather than nothing, therefore God" non sequitur
I think you are being far too generous on what the caller was trying to say. I believe the caller's point was to connect the universe to the guitar thing, which is another version of the watchmaker argument. The caller fully knew what Matt was doing with his debunking. Matt even acknowledged it at the end, it exposed a flaw in the caller's thinking which is why the caller had to say, basically, that the universe is special, which Matt pointed out is the Special pleading fallacy.
Tl:DR; Special pleading, moving the goalposts
Additionally, after watching enough of these watchmaker, look at the trees style arguments, or Kalam arguments: God is special pleading incarnate for these arguments. Everything that exists was created, but who created God? Oh no God is special, he/she needs no creator. Or, god just started the universe at time 0, because he is spaceless/timeless. Or you have to have a God to prevent an infinite regression, but the assertion that "no God=infinite regression" is balder than Mr. Clean. Or without God, you can't prove to be "absolutely certain" that you aren't just a brain in a vat, which like, maybe God is the one putting everyone in Vats to begin with. Or God just started the process of evolution, and let go of the wheel, except where he should also be responsible for every single element of the "natural selection part", e.g. climate conditions, natural disasters, extinction events, development of cancers and mutations due to solar radiation. When these types of absurd conclusions get reduced down like demi glaze, it's like playing make believe games with that one kid: I shoot you with my laser, and somehow you have laser proof shields.
Most top theoretical physicists don't think that the BB was the absolute beginning of everything, just a beginning point of the known universe.
I still don't understand why people think existence has a beginning
@Checkeroute I think it's a frame of reference thing. Like, we push Play on a video and it runs from a definite beginning to a definite end. It can be difficult to step outside familiar perspectives and think about ideas like "if everything was compressed to the point that there was no space, then there was no time either."
The T-Zero argument for God might be the most adorable argument for a god yet.
A comment for interaction
This day started at Time Zero. Does this indicate intention? Nope!
Bad argument, cause we invented the 24h clock where we did put in a point zero.
Without that clock you have ZERO reference point on when that accually occurs 😉
Pun intended
I understand exactly why Matt gets so upset. There is a lot of this going on: clear and concise evidence laid out before people, patterns that we’ve observed for centuries, yet they refuse to submit to simple Truth.🤦🏾♀️
And if you refuse to submit to Truth then that makes you a _liar._
Just another guy who knows how the universe began.
Why do creationists always use examples of manmade objects to reflect how the universe was created?
Try using a tree as an example. Who created it? Nobody. Who created the universe? Nobody.
See how bad your argument is?
Their entire way of thinking revolves around creation. They use manmade objects as a comparison because of their inherent bias that everything has been created by somone. Man or God. They can not use a tree because they would answer that by stating God created the tree and we are back at the original argument again.
They can not conceive the absense of a creator as the creator itself is the foundation of their rationalization process for everything.
To tear down that foundation would only leave them with a universe born of chaos. Which is the only concept I've found that scares beleivers more than hell.
Because if chaos is truth, then they don't matter. They aren't special..
This is what religion does to one's ability to reason.
This happens so often in podcasts and documentaries that I fantasize about starting a podcast called ;Yes or NO', where the very first word spoken HAS to be yes or no, and THEN the theist can explain his reasoning. If the caller doesn't answer yes or no first - DISCONNECT!
Hey, Matt and Eve, I'll answer the question: "No, time is not evidence of a cause." That wasn't hard to do.
Even if the theist disagreed, he could have simply said, 'Yes, time is evidence of a cause, and here's my reasoning."
But, theists truly hate yes or no questions.
I''m surprised they let this go on for so long
Callers like Tom have what they believe is a slam dunk argument. So they don't come properly prepared to defend it because they don't expect to do so.