As an Atheist, I ask a similar question to believers = Is there anything that would make you stop believing in your specific god? If yes, what? If no, then honestly think, that is how cult followers think. That is being close minded and Dangerous.
Atheist doesn't have a capital A it is a descriptive term not a title. It is important, because the word atheism is misrepresented as its own religion so often.
@@WhoThisMonkey You have a point. My native language is not English. Already, english is not with a capital E in my language, but I think it is in yours. I will think about it. And then in Europe (where I live) no one who claims that atheism is a religion. Not to my knowledge.
@@MrCanis4 Unfortunately I'm pretty sure the 'Atheism is a religion' nonsense is an American phenomenon. I don't encounter it in person here in the UK either, only online.
@@WhoThisMonkey in the UK news this week. Believers are now a minority. And didn't we have mass immigration from Muslims and former Soviet countries right, Poland, Bulgaria, Hungary, Romania? . . . I think religion would almost have disappeared out the back door. Here in Belgium we also had a federal survey. There are now more practicing Muslims in Belgium than practicing Christians.
"Remarkable things happen in the name of religion" Things like Crusades,Inquisitions,Terrorism,War,Discrimination,Indoctrination,Delusion and the glorification of ignorance.
As Steven Weinberg said: Good people will do good things with or without religion. Bad people will do bad things with or without religion. But for good people to do bad things - that takes religion.
Family members abandoned is very common in the US. This is for the reason of the need to move due to the religious beliefs or parents disowning due to non-belief.
Props to Brian for being a pleasant caller. Unfortunately, he suffers from a simple case of special pleading, to which he basically acknowledged at the end.
@@gknight4719I also disagree on the pleasantness. When JMike absolutely destroyed the idea of a deity and Forrest tosses in the “what evidence would it be”, he immediately tries to tackle Forrest. He’s not a moron, literally came after the only point of view that MAYBE is a little weaker than the other. AND he misrepresented it right off the bat “no evidence to provide” and “seems like there’s nothing that can prove it”. Just my two cents.
STOP the stupidity. Atheism is a religion. Any belief re the cause of this universe is a religion and you've tagged yourself an "atheist" because you believe atheist ideas re the cause of this universe (nature: time/space/matter/energy. You also believe that evolution is the "controlling power" over life, instead of God. THAT is religion. Either you have a RATIONAL POSSIBLE world view or you don't. To be an atheist and have no factual basis for your cult, is to be content to be even more lost and clueless than yesterday. Why do you cling so desperately to an asinine atheist cult that's INFAMOUS the world over for having ZERO ANSWERS? Could you be more lost and clueless? Einstein called atheism "a religion formed to reject other religions. How cute and desperate they are." I know it hurts to know that the most famous and respected scientist of our generation believed atheists to be pathetic idiots.
@@owersmenbwroten9813 How many times will you continue to misrepresent and misunderstand atheism? We tell you in every thread, multiple times over that atheism isn’t a religion, a cult, or worldview.
Honestly as an Atheist I have no idea what kind of evidence would convince me 1. Of the existence/relevance of any God/s, or 2. That I should be worshipping this god in any capacity. If theists want to convince atheist's of the existence of all the Gods they've dreamed up throughout human history, they've done a pretty poor job. Why can't they just be content with the billions of brainwashed folks they've already fooled?
I have no idea either. Every single theist claim or argument that I've ever heard seems incoherent or nonsensical, in addition to being utterly unsupported by even the most ordinary sort of evidence. But that's not really the point of investigation anyway. The matter would simply not come up for discussion if theists didn't raise it in the first place. Apparently THEY have evidence which was enough to convince them. So if they want us to take an interest, they're free to share their evidence, and we're free to decide ON THAT BASIS if it convinces us also. We didn't show up with the claim. So how on earth would we have been convinced of it enough to raise it for discussion? It makes no sense. It would be like someone coming up to you on the street and asking you to give them the rules for judging a flea circus, so that they could show you their flea circus and you could decide if it won some contest for best flea circus. What? Who is old enough to even remember what a flea circus is? And why would you care? And how is it up to you to come up with rules for judging them? Let the flea circus people sort that out, and stop bothering everyone else.
@@starfishsystems Pretty much exact words I would have said, except last 2 redundant paragraphs. Decades ago when I first heard a Christain provide their _reason_ to believe, I honestly thought they were joking. Now some many thousands of Christain testimonies later, I think their reasoning and _evidence_ is even worse. It's like church 'leaders' (Lol) are now straight out instructing them with absolute illogical irrational (and extremely incoherent) lines of reasoning. Not too long ago I heard a theist say (and this is common). The reason why I believe is because when I was a boy I had a dream of a white horse riding past, and then a man sat down next to me and it was Jesus! (Although they can't remember if he was black or white). I replied: That doesn't make sense!!!!!!! Have you completely lost your damn mind?
The best answer I could come up with: -If God is all-knowing, then he knows how to convince me -If God is all-powerful, then he is able to do what would convince me -If God wants me to believe in him, then he will do what would convince me
The Problem Atheists have is they unnecessarily overcomplicate it God is simply the existence of Love. That’s what we Follow. Everybody Believes Love exists. To deny that fact is not only Unfortunate It’s Shameful
@@damianedwards8827 LOL, no, that's not at all what you think or follow if you're a Christian. Maybe you're a "Lover" or some new religion that simply believes that the feeling of love is a god, but that's a different issue. You seem to want to use words in your own way. Fine, but don't expect us to know what you mean or agree with you.
When a theist asks what evidence an atheist would accept as proof of a god, to me, that's the equivalent of asking : "why don't you believe the same nonsense as I do ? "
I used to be a Jehovah's Witness. The reason I left and become an atheist is because I wanted proof. There is no proof in religion. What it comes down to, is you believe what you want. I kept asking questions and got back these pigeon-hole answers. JWs are famous for answering a question with a question.
This video is titled "What evidence are atheists looking for?" The question presupposes atheists are actually looking for evidence which is obviously a false premise.
@@youhaveaGodregardlesscreature Your first sentence doesn’t seem to make any sense, common or otherwise. As for the rest, how do you know God is the source? How do you know there is any “source”? How do you know that creatures cannot develop intelligence and awareness by themselves? You are just making wild assumptions about things we don’t know.
@@FourDeuce01 i mean yeah, we get that but *_they don't._* ASKING about it however, might make them realize: "Great and remarkable things, in art, and literature, and culture, and community, have happened in the name of Vishnu, and there can't be any concrete evidence of Vishnu since as you just said: there can't be any concrete evidence of 'a deity' -- so are you willing to believe in Vishnu based on just that 'standard' of evidence?"
If God appeared to the world and apologized for every horrible act he ever made happen, and was able to tell me what I prayed for when I was 10, I'd believe in him, but I would still refuse to worship him.
How would you know that it was God? As for telling you things that are know to you, how would you conclude that you weren't remembering the information and just imagining that you were experiencing the God-thing? Just asking how you would resolve those.
God would know what kind of evidence would convince unbelievers. That he hasn't presented any means one of two things: 1 He's not inclined to present any, in which case he's good with torturing unbelievers in his special hell - but he loves us! 2 There is none. Of the two, no evidence being available is the more likely.
Yes, at the time of Michelangelo and Leonardo Da Vinci the Catholic Church was the only entity that was paying for art. Besides the money aspect, anyone who is a devote believer can be inspired to do great things in the name of what they believe in. If you create great art or music because of your belief in a God, that certainly does not provide any evidence that a God exists. George Lucas had a strong belief in a story about Jedi Knights fighting a battle in space against the evil forces of Darth Vader. George's vision created or inspired a movie franchise of 12 films that have been highly acclaimed as an art form and been embedded into popular culture. George's commitment to the character of Luke Skywalker is not evidence that Luke Skywalker exists.
Where I live they had a really profitable scam going in the middle ages: Farmers would will half their property to the church in return for going to heaven. So more than half the fields, farms and woods around here ended up belonging to the church. God times!
@@tzenophile Here in Sweden, the former state church ("Svenska kyrkan" Church of Sweden) still owns 2 % of all the farmland, and 2 % of all the forests. Historically this was called "priest salary property". The farmers had to donate a piece of land each to be able to create a congregation, and that land was meant to pay for the priests upkeep.
As i keep repeating to them : "If God truly exists, and is as powerful as you claim, then in order to convince me, he should know how and where to find me." I'm very easy to convince with proper evidence...
What good would that do for God to come and find you? You are going to go around telling everybody that God came to you and then you will be locked up in a mental hospital. That idea, my friend will not work.
@@bmoshareholderappleshareho855 Religious people make these claims constantly. Most religious people will make these claims. It should be cause for concern about mental health but sadly its widely accepted in society
I can tell you this much, there's no evidence of your god's existence to be found anywhere in that Bible. I'm 40 years old, and I have never once seen, heard, or experienced anything in my own life that would convince me that any god exists outside of fiction.
A christian asking an atheist what evidence they are looking for to believe in god is like a prosecutor asking the jury what evidence they are looking for to get a conviction. Would you accept DNA? Would you accept finger prints? Would you accept video surveillance? Would you accept the murder weapon found in the defendant's possession?... ....Well, I don't have any of that, but IF I did then you'd be sure to issue a guilty verdict wouldn't you? I rest my case.
My general answer to this question is first, “Which god?” since that’s pretty important. Often I just flippantly say, “What evidence do you have?” since I take the question as an weak attempt to avoid the burden of proof. Don’t ask me to help you to prove your god exists.
I usually ask "define 'god'," since ultimately, without a definition, their question is meaningless. Besides, the specific details of the definition are important: if the definition is unfalsifiable, then it is impossible that any evidence exist to prove its existence.
0:43 there's already the first problem of the caller: if there's evidence, you don't have to believe. As soon as there is evidence you don't have to have faith, it's proven reality. If there is evidence, we don't have to believe in a god, we know he/she/it/whatever is there.
I would want him to speak to all mankind from the clouds and make a show, or visit me and tell me something about myself no one could know. The point at around 5:00 with the hammer is a good one in my opinion. Look how far we've come in the last 200 years with science when religion brings mankind nothing. No progress, no new knowledge, nothing.
they ask different questions. and address different fields of knowledge Science asks questions “a posteriori” in a very narrow and very specific field related to natural philosophy. Metaphysics by contrast addresses questions 'a priori' that science cannot, nor ever will ever answer. Science uses 3rd person objectivity. Metaphysics precedes this rational with introspective 1st person subjectivity. it is a mistake of science advocates to insist that philosophy has no value, when science procedes after philosophy. Likewise, it is a mistake for religious proponents with in philosophy to attack science methodology.
How about It making a worldwide telepathic announcement that It would make the moon spin at exactly 3.1415 RPM for seven days and seven nights starting right now? Hey only the blind would doubt.
It’s frustrating hearing callers like Brian because you know he’s not an idiot. It’s just religion has a strong hold on so many people that they can’t seem to let go no matter how logical they are with anything else in life, with religion the special pleading takes charge.
"What kind of evidence would you need?" Anything. Literally any evidence at all. Even just a single piece of evidence would cause me to re-evaluate my position. And yet, after 2,000 years there is still nothing. The real question is, "Why is blind faith enough for theists?"
For me it will always come back to the fact that a god, if he is omnipotent, knows exactly what would convince me. He, if he is omnipotent, would also know how to avoid alternative explanations like, for example, an advanced alien species. Almost 30 years. Still waiting.
@@fpcoleman57 there are many deities who are not considered to be omnipotent, usually in polytheistic traditions. Atheists rarely if ever attack polytheistic traditions though because they used whatever intellectual capacity they had on their attempts to destroy Christianity.
@@melchior2678 I live in a "Western" country. The reason why I "attack" Christianity is because that religion has been and continues to have the largest historical and cultural influence on the society in which I live. In my country it is still the state religion and affects the laws and other decision making activities of those in power. In the United States anyone who wants to attain high office must at the very least express a nominal belief and go to church. The predominant influence of religious teachings on people's lives is huge. If I lived in a majority Islamic or Hindu country I would behave in the same way as I do with Christianity with those religions. In my country Islam is a minority belief but has a disproportionate effect on the daily life of non Moslems and therefore should be challenged as well. For that reason I also "attack" Islam. If Christianity had never been more than a minor sect of Judaism and the Roman pantheon of gods was still the largest belief system I would be challenging that instead but history turned out differently.
@@fpcoleman57 Hmmm I find it super interesting that you say that Christianity is in fact only a sect of Judaism, yet you focus your attack on a mere sect rather than the overarching religion of which you say it is a part. Hmmm I wonder why that is.... 😎
I don't have an active belief that there are gods, but having read the BuyBull, I am firmly convinced that the Abrahamic god, whether you want to call it YHWH, Jehovah, Allah or whatever is a logical contradiction and the probability that it exists as described in the BuyBull approaches 0%. Yes, religion has changed History in dramatic ways. The problem is that the bad changes vastly outweigh the good.
This one has always been easy for me. What kind of evidence would I need? I have absolutely no idea. You know who would though? This God character. If he was out there he would know exactly what evidence I'd need and would be fully able to provide it. Here I wait.
I liked JMike's point about the houses and skyscrapers... what results can theists/spiritual types and other magical thinkers show they have attained as a result of their practice? It's all just "fake it 'til you make it" without any of them ever "making it" as far as I can see.
"Live a good life. If there are gods and they are just, then they will not care how devout you have been, but will welcome you based on the virtues you have lived by. If there are gods, but unjust, then you should not want to worship them. If there are no gods, then you will be gone, but will have lived a noble life that will live on in the memories of your loved ones." -Marcus Aurelius "Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful." ~Lucius Annaeus Seneca
The marbles example is actually quite good. If you think about it: what’s the difference for the person that is taking out the marbles one by one, what colors are inside the bag if the only marbles he takes out are blue? Even if there are marbles of different color he will still take out the blue ones! So effectively for that person only the blue marbles exist! The same way until the god or any supernatural thing doesn’t effect our reality they are effectively nonexistent!
For me if the God can make a human out of clay right in front of me and the (made) human can be examined and confirmed to actually be a human, that would be pretty impressive.
I have noticed that this, "What evidence would convince you that there is a god?" is the latest apologist fad. It is frequently used as a type of thought reform. The questioner is asking, sometimes openly, to imagine there is a god. They are then asking for the evidence that will get you to believe in this imaginary god. The process, if you engage with it, then continues with them getting you to see your imaginary god as their imaginary god with imaginary evidence to support it, until it belief can be developed. In open discussion, this technique is dishonest at best, however, if the questioner has some degree of control over the environment of the listener it is a form of victimisation.
@@billsherman1565 Try this, what evidence would convince you the Tooth Fairy actually exists? Think carefully about this. You are the one demanding evidence so you need to tell me what evidence you require.
@@freakyzed8467 What are you talking about? That is exactly how it works. If I'm talking to an antivaxxer, and cite the mountains of evidence for vaccines, and then they go "Well that doesn't convince me, but idk what would." They're not being reasonable for one, but they're also being absurd by pretending that they would ever change their mind! It's inadvertently admitted you don't think your claim is falsifiable.
I did a similar test with the belief that horoscopes predict your personality. My coworker believes this. I asked how well do you know my personality? I will answer any question, that I believe provides information about my personality, omitting birth date related information. Then if you can guess which horoscope sign is mine, then I will become surprised and be more inclined to believe your future predictions. Within Christianity, that style of reasoning is typically discouraged. At least in my experience.
Humans evolved to see the beauty in the nature of the world. Humans have also evolved to see the ugliness in the nature of the world. If the nature of trees were different, we would have evolved to see them differently.
The evidence I would require would be such that it would be convincing. But I don't dictate what that would be BEFORE I evaluate it. I don't think of it in terms of "you must present THIS to convince me", because that places limits on what can be presented and evaluated. I'd rather allow the theist to present the best they've got, then I'll evaluate it and see if it's convincing...but if I were to decide what would be convincing before I see it and evaluate it, wouldn't that be sort of poisoning the well?
Forrest bringing up that going back in time he would be perceived as a god to people with no concept of our technologies. This has happened on more than a few occasions and it’s documented too. People from a more technologically advanced culture interact with people without those technologies and the latter create myths or start to worship them and it has been observed in return trips too. When you don’t have a concept of a technology it’s hard to grasp, you don’t have the language for it so you create mythological explanations
So once a theist actually provides indisputable evidence of the existence of deity, now the bigger mountain would be providing an actual acceptable reason to worship said deity.
The “great art and music because of religion” is an old claim that completely ignores the fact that the church had the WEALTH to PAY for that art and music. For four years of painting the Sistine Chapel, Michelangelo was paid the equivalent of 2.9 million dollars.
It is easy - observations that are recorded and repeatable. Measurements that can be tested by anyone. A mathematic model that explains how things happen. Since supernatural things are not consistent with all known physics, so there would need to be a model for how that can be, the particles and forces that operate there, and how it can interact with the physical universe, and what evidence there is for that interaction, and how to observe and record it. That is how evidence works.
I would thoroughly impressed with walking on water, sticks turning into snakes, the night of zombies accompanying an resurrection. Those things seems not happen anymore. Paranormal phenomenons related to consciousness are not totally ruled out, so predictions don't do it form me. There is correlation outside the light cone.
My first question would be “why do you want me to worship you?” How narcissistic is “god” that he created beings so they could worship him? Imagine having children just so they could worship you their whole life? 😢
Brian has not travelled in Ireland, where religion definitely did NOT bring people together. Or Jerusalem. Or India. As Hitchens once asked in a debate (I have lost the exact quote, so I must paraphrase), "Explain for me the secular roots of anti-semitism". Brian seems like a nice guy but he could be a professional cherry-picker!
I’ve always thought the “look how much good religion does” argument for god(s) very strange. And it just gets stranger the deeper you look. On the surface level, I can’t imagine anyone sincerely making the argument is unaware that religion has also been associated with harms. They may believe that _humans_ caused the harms by _not_ following the faith properly. They may attribute those harms to _other_ religions than their own. They might argue that those same harms would’ve been even worse without religion. A few bold people will even argue that those weren’t harms-that the Albigensian Crusade and attempting to beat the gay out of people are good things. But none of those arguments (except the last) do anything to mitigate the harms, and at best you’re still left with “God(s) let people do these bad things in their name”. And at the second level, there are non-theistic religions, both animist and atheist. Maybe it’s just a hole in my knowledge of history, but I don’t recall anywhere near the level of death and destruction associated with any of them that is associated with most of the theistic religions. So at this level the “religion is true because it does good” argument looks to me like an argument against a god-centered religion. And another layer deeper, let’s say that someone makes a truly convincing argument that religion (one of them or all of them) has done more good than harm. Or convinces us that so much of the good people have done as part of religion would not have been done without it, but the evil would’ve happened (if in slightly different form) anyway. That, as this caller said, religion is a massive boon to society. That’s _still_ not an argument for God or for divine inspiration. In fact, it’s an extremely persuasive argument that religion is so valuable to society that it needed to be invented whether or not there are gods or spiritual beings or souls or an afterlife. Stated in a stronger fashion, I would argue that if religion truly is such a boon to society, the societies that invented it would flourish and the ones that didn’t would die out, be conquered/assimilated, or be out-competed. And so _if_ it were such a boon, religion would arise naturally without any need for God to explain it. “Religion builds societies” isn’t just not an argument for the deities that religion generates being true; it’s an argument that the existence of religion _can’t_ be an argument for the existence if those deities.
I want evidence that isn't contradictory, not forged, doesn't have translation issues, a book with known authors, a coherent timeline, concrete dates for the writings, is historically possible, scientifically possible, and a god that actually shows up and proves it can create a universe from nothing.
2:28 this is a logic argument I've spent some time racking my brain with "If something comes up to you and claims to be god, how do you know it is not the devil?" The devil is a stand in for anything with powers (intent, intelligence, reality bending, ect) sufficiently superior to yours that you can't use normal "well turn water into wine" arguments to dismiss the claim. It's about figuring out the intent, not just if this thing is powerful. Closest thing I've come to an answer is asking it to pray with you, i.e. ask it to perform an act that something without "pure intent" would not be able to do. However I think anyone reading this can see the many many ways that wouldn't work.
The building analogy is very precise and usable. A bunch of theist standing in the next building lot claiming their building is going up also but we just can't see it so we have to trust the elevator or the stairs that don't exist now who looks crazy
@@thatguyrich9822 What good is being the omnipotent lord of the Universe if all you can afford is WalMart box wine? Then again they're always asking for money at church. Hmm...
Paraphrasing: “Doesn’t the evidence dilemma take God completely off the table?” In my head: Yes, the attributes that we give God is thus far incompatible with evidence. That is the whole point!
@@melchior2678 you just copied Jim’s line and switched Christian to atheist. That is a very classic Theist action; To steal ideas and twist them to your liking
God could come to earth and tell us about himself. Oh wait! Jesus already did that. God could give us a book; sort of an owners manual concerning his creation. Oh wait! God already did that w/ the Bible. It looks like you're all out of excuses, pal.
@@owersmenbwroten9813 no idea what you smoke but i never met a Jesus. Yet alone some jesus that could proof he was a god. All I have is a book full of obviously fictional stories
@@owersmenbwroten9813 jesus never existed. It is called Christian Mythology. The Buy Bull is a book of superstition and mythology mixed with fairy tales and nonsense written by Bronze Age men who didn't even know where the sun went at night. Could you be any dumber?
I actually don't think this is a good approach, it just kindof ends conversation. Imagine if this was any other issue. like If i was trying to convince a religious person that theism was a drain on society, and I sent what I thought was tons of evidence. Then they go "Im not convinced, and idk what would convince me" there's no point in engaging at that point.
@@billsherman1565 Their intentions are dishonest. They aren't asking the questions for honest reasons, it is all to try to lead you down a script. How is that honest?
And if I did I would be pissed off if he could stop the starving children, took away cancer from children but as I find he doesn’t do it he is nota god of love. Emperors new clothes.
Every scenario including yours tells me it’s too late. And if a god appeared after all of the cruelty and suffering in this world, it doesn’t deserve any respect from human kind.
@@TrumanSparx Yea, for me it's like, even if someone could prove god exists, at this point, given all I have been told about god, I would not want a relationship with him anyway, so it will never matter to me one way or the other.
When I was a kid in school, we had this substitute teacher. She spent a lot of time talking about God. She was telling us this one story about a little girl who lost a tooth. The little girl prayed and prayed and the tooth grew back. It seems like people who believe in God are not very smart.
And, as the caller said, that "higher power" could be an alien being. And, any being with greater power that humans *would* be a "higher power". That still gives me no reason to worship it or even like it. If it does good, that's great! Still, no reason to worship.
Invite Brian back for more conversation. The 3 of you did a great job of looking at possibilities. I for one would rather be ignorant than to be misinformed. Again thanks for the sober non emotional conversation.
Ignorant? There's no need to be ignorant; to not KNOW! But WE DO KNOW. It’s much worse than you “DON’T KNOW.” All your atheist ideas (e.g. big bang, abiogenesis, evolution) have been proven to be IMPOSSIBLE. They’re certainly never OBSERVED. YOU CANNOT KNOW the supernatural by natural means. YOU CANNOT KNOW the creator, by trying to find him within the set limits of his creation. Scientifically, the metaphysical cannot be known and thus, science has it's dangerous limitations concerning your eternal destiny. That said, let's look at what we do know: The high-complexity/high function designed/creation we find in the READY TO REPRODUCE human being, is IMPOSSIBLE to have come by CHANCE via the MINDLESS UNGUIDED processes of atheism (big bang, abiogenesis, evolution). Furthermore, LIFE the we clearly see in the world, is IMPOSSIBLE to come by CHANCE from the MINDLESS UNGUIDED processes of atheism (big bang, abiogenesis, evolution). Furthermore, INTELLIGENCE that we clearly see in the world, is IMPOSSIBLE to come by CHANCE via the MINDLESS UNGUIDED processes of atheism (big bang, abiogenesis, evolution). Our living intelligent G0D IS THE ONLY POSSIBLE OPTION for LIFE, INTELLIGENCE & THE HUMAN BEING'S EXISTENCE. Because why? Because whoever did design/create the high-complexity/high function found in the READY TO REPRODUCE human being, has intelligence, resources and power FAR BEYOND that of mankind (G0D). WE DO KNOW (Romans 1:20), so much so that we are ‘WITHOUT EXCUSE” not to know that God exists.
Very simple for me: I think of a number. You pray to god and ask him what the number is. If he gets it right, and if this works every time someone tries it, I would admit to a supernatural force which can read thoughts. It would be a start. Now you may think God would not reveal to you the answer every time. You would have to find a true prophet up to the task. And how do you know who is? And who would step forward? I would guess nobody. Or they may say God wouldn't give such a sign, but how do they know? In Bible stories god gives signs to unbelievers all the time! And if you can't think of anybody capable or willing to reveal such simple answer, how can you trust any preacher who claims to know god's will?
@@Diviance Sure it could be, and I know that the existence of an all-knowing, all-powerful being is the ultimate improbability, but It would be a start. I don't want to be completely closed to the idea of changing my mind because that's the religious domain, an absolute conviction. Reason's domain is the willingness to change with the evidence presented.
@@Diviance GIVE ME PROOF THAT YOU ARE NOT GOD OR IF YOU ARE THAT RELIGIOUS MEANS GOD IS. YOU HAVE NO EVIDENCE ATHEIST OR THEIST EXISTS...YOU TALKING, SAY YOU ARE NOT WHAT THE OCCULTIST MEANS A GOD IS AND YOU ONLY SAY YOU ARE A ATHEIST. I DONT KNOW! PRESENT YOUR EVIDENCE... WE DONT KNOW WHO WE ARE... PEOPLE WHO SAY THEY ARE ATHEISTS OR THEISTS ARE NOT CREDIBLE... EXACTLY... O! MY! GOD! I APPRECIATES WHAT YOU TOLD ME...
That’s a good last question. Where else do we use faith, rather than experiential? Romantic love is a lot like religion. I trust my partner of many years based on evidence, but when we met, it was purely on faith. I felt it as strongly as any religious experience. And on the first few dates, it’s all a gamble if it will work out. I felt it in my heart, not my head, that I could trust her forever. That’s a huge amount of faith. Does that qualify as an answer to your question?
You are simply using faith in 2 different ways. You trusting your partner when you forst met is not the kind of faith you are using to have faith that God exists.
This is why I think faith should be divided into secular faith and religious faith. Secular faith tends to be belief in something because of observations/evidence, religious faith tends to be belief in something despite no evidence or even evidence to the contrary. Eg. Secular faith: You have faith that you can trust your wife, because you have observed throughout your time together that she loves you, and has never given you a reason to think that she has or will cheat on you. Religious faith: people believe that we were designed and created by God, when there are numerous features such as vestigial limbs/organs, genetic diseases, cancer, mental illness, the recurrent laryngeal nerve, viral DNA within our own, etc etc, that a designer would be pretty stupid to include. If we were designed, that designer is incompetent.
@@stephenolan5539 that's true, if the person in question admits there is nothing that could make them change their opinion, then they've fallen victim to a cult mindset and there probably isn't much hope for them.
Sorry, me again. I often hear folks saying "the beauty of nature" is enough proof of god. Well, yes, nature is beautiful, because that is what we want to see, but I also know that nature is a constant struggle for survival. All animals and plants are in constant battle, if you will, trying to feed their young by killing something else that is also trying to survive. Is that beautiful? Is the fly in the spiderweb saying "Wow, what a beautiful view there is from here!" Silly, I know, but still.
The caller says that beautiful art comes from religion? That is a lie ! The art comes from the sciences! Like painting is because of the invention of paint and pigment! And sculpture is because of metallurgy having metal that is harder than the stone being carved is huge! People have to attribute the right thing for the advancement of humanity!
I made sure I was by myself in my bedroom and sincerely asked god with all my heart that he would turn the light off and on again. I got nothing. Surely it would be a sinch for an omnipotent, omnipresent, all loving and all powerful god to flick that switch. It would also stop me from instilling doubt in a lot of christians minds. He clearly doesn't give a shit or more likely just doesn't exist. If any theists read this and say, "god didn't flick the switch because you're not a true christian" I implore them to try the same experiment before commenting and tell me how it went.
You know some believer will say they did and leave out the fact that there was a thunderstorm in their area screwing around with the electrical grid lol.
God spoke with Adam & Eve, and most of the profits. I’d be convinced if I had several conversations with the voice of god. Or a conversation with an angel. If god wants to know me, let him introduce himself to me. I’d still get a CAT scan.
I remember an episode of Sanford and Son, where Fred decided to start a church to make money. It was called "the Church of the Holy Profit." (I think you meant "prophet")
One of the main problems with an evidence based arguments for a god is that god itself is so fuzzily defined that it’s impossible to do. But that isn’t a problem on the side of atheism….
16:30 tightly knit also means it's a us vs them, sure it's nice that they like each other but the reason for it is because they fear/don't like the rest of the world It's more about division than unification
JMike has powerful magic hair! 🤣🤣🤣 Love ya JMike and hope you’re no longer stressed out about your school exams/tests/papers, or whatever it was that you were stressed out about last week concerning your school work, but I’m sure you did well. Evidence of god? Well if amputees had limb’s grow back, new eyeball’s for blind people, no more terminal illnesses, no more starvation, homelessness, no more war, and suffering, etc, etc, etc…..then I’ll believe in a god! Love love love you too Forrest…you’re a fucking scream!!! I love your humor! 🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹 I love what Forrest said, god would know what it would take to change his mind but god has chosen not to do it! Nice comeback Forrest! THE BALL IS IN GOD’S COURT! ⚽️🏀🏈⚾️🎾🏐🏉🥎 RIGHT JMike…Take me to Lowes or Home Depot so I can find shit to build my shit! 🤣🤣 Ahhhh Roland the closet goblin and I just went out on a date for dinner and a movie…he’s hot!!! How come I’m the only one who still believes in Santa Clause? He’s coming soon so you better be good! 🎅🏼🎅🏼🎅🏼🎅🏼 Definition of faith….Gullibility and also pretending to know thing’s that you know nothing about. 🤣🤣🤣🤣 I love being an Atheist!!! Statistics have proven that there are more divorces in religious communities than there are among Atheists….go figure.
Yes Santa Clause is coming very soon. He knows when you are sleeping, he knows when your awake, he knows if you've been naughty or nice and just about everything about you. Why have I been writing letters to Santa for almost seven decades, if already knows what I want for Christmas? Next year, I'm going to save the stamp.
When I used to be JW, a JW member was going around telling people, "I prayed to Jehovah to furnish me a wife and he furnished me a wife. You see, Jehovah does answer prayers." The guy was making 40K per annum in the year 1983. That's like somebody making 160K per annum in today's dollars. I guess with a salary like God really felt that he needed a wife. Based on that story, I guess God does exist because he answered that guy's request for a wife. No, there is no god. By the way, did I make you laugh?
@@bmoshareholderappleshareho855 The problem there is I don't have an address to write to for the Easter Bunny and I'm not sure he can even read. The last I heard, the Bunny was sleeping on the Tooth Fairy's couch.
@@robinharwood5044 Yea she Cardea, is very benevolent goddess, or so they have told me, she also guarded against evil spirits and did not let them in, for a certain price i assume. There was also Portunus who was god of locks.... Soo aa i think they worked together....Or something
That hammer analogy was great. Edit: also, Jmike, you said [someone] could _be_ rest assured, but (as you probably already noticed) it's their _rest_ that can be done while assured (of whatever proposition's truth). So you don't need the word "be," but you may have just misspoken. Anyway, I'm fucking baked. It took me like a half hour to type that.
The God Christians believe in could easily provide evidence of His existence that would convince even the strongest non-believer. I don't know exactly what that evidence would be, but that God would know without question. The claim is that He and Jesus want all of us believe and to follow. Why wouldn't He come out of hiding? How silly the whole debate is. I hazard a guess that when the scientists pin down how the universe, and life, came about, the answer will be something no one has even thought of so far. I think that answer will have nothing to do with anything supernatural. The real question is whether or not we will survive bombardment by asteroids long enough to fully understand the cosmos. Perhaps. We're gaining ground.
In my opinion, the fact that in the Christian religion their deity wants me to believe in it... knows how to accomplish that goal and has the power to do it instantly, with no effort, at _any_ time and there is nothing that could possibly prevent him from doing so and _I still don't believe..._ well, that fact is convincing enough, for me, to say that their God must not exist.
My question is with a god that powerful, why did he even allow evolved primates to “interpret” his message, deciding what’s “holy” or not, and why are those particular primates so shite at arguing and presenting evidence?
I would make one observation to that caller: Nobody has ever produced any falsifiable evidence to support the existence claim of any god in the last 5,000 years. And .. . falsifiable evidence has the properties of measureability, repeatability and predictability.
As an Atheist, I ask a similar question to believers = Is there anything that would make you stop believing in your specific god?
If yes, what?
If no, then honestly think, that is how cult followers think. That is being close minded and Dangerous.
You can also ask them why they don't believe in a another god. And why their reason does not apply to themselves.
Atheist doesn't have a capital A it is a descriptive term not a title.
It is important, because the word atheism is misrepresented as its own religion so often.
@@WhoThisMonkey You have a point. My native language is not English. Already, english is not with a capital E in my language, but I think it is in yours.
I will think about it.
And then in Europe (where I live) no one who claims that atheism is a religion. Not to my knowledge.
@@MrCanis4
Unfortunately I'm pretty sure the 'Atheism is a religion' nonsense is an American phenomenon.
I don't encounter it in person here in the UK either, only online.
@@WhoThisMonkey in the UK news this week. Believers are now a minority.
And didn't we have mass immigration from Muslims and former Soviet countries right, Poland, Bulgaria, Hungary, Romania? . . . I think religion would almost have disappeared out the back door.
Here in Belgium we also had a federal survey. There are now more practicing Muslims in Belgium than practicing Christians.
"Remarkable things happen in the name of religion"
Things like Crusades,Inquisitions,Terrorism,War,Discrimination,Indoctrination,Delusion and the glorification of ignorance.
As Steven Weinberg said:
Good people will do good things with or without religion.
Bad people will do bad things with or without religion.
But for good people to do bad things - that takes religion.
@@TheChiog or some similar kind of endoctrination
@@cepahreinholt8710 yes
Those are “misses”. Religious apologists like to ignore the misses and count the hits.🤡
Family members abandoned is very common in the US. This is for the reason of the need to move due to the religious beliefs or parents disowning due to non-belief.
Caller: What evidence do you need to be convinced?
Me: Um...any evidence?
Exactly
That would be a start.
“Look into your feelings”
@@dryfox11 "Just look at a tree! Only God can create something so magnificent!"
@@dx1450 💀
Props to Brian for being a pleasant caller. Unfortunately, he suffers from a simple case of special pleading, to which he basically acknowledged at the end.
Special pleading is all they got, and when that does not work "OUT COME THE THREATS"!
@@gknight4719I also disagree on the pleasantness. When JMike absolutely destroyed the idea of a deity and Forrest tosses in the “what evidence would it be”, he immediately tries to tackle Forrest. He’s not a moron, literally came after the only point of view that MAYBE is a little weaker than the other. AND he misrepresented it right off the bat “no evidence to provide” and “seems like there’s nothing that can prove it”.
Just my two cents.
“The first priest was the first rogue who met the first fool.” - Voltaire
Gimme you lamb and 15' with your wife and I'll tell the Floaty One to bless y'all...
JMike's explanation of the atheist's perspective on religion on building houses is great. First time hearing that one.
Yeah, was a rather nice way to go about it!
STOP the stupidity. Atheism is a religion. Any belief re the cause of this universe is a religion and you've tagged yourself an "atheist" because you believe atheist ideas re the cause of this universe (nature: time/space/matter/energy. You also believe that evolution is the "controlling power" over life, instead of God. THAT is religion.
Either you have a RATIONAL POSSIBLE world view or you don't. To be an atheist and have no factual basis for your cult, is to be content to be even more lost and clueless than yesterday.
Why do you cling so desperately to an asinine atheist cult that's INFAMOUS the world over for having ZERO ANSWERS? Could you be more lost and clueless?
Einstein called atheism "a religion formed to reject other religions. How cute and desperate they are." I know it hurts to know that the most famous and respected scientist of our generation believed atheists to be pathetic idiots.
@@owersmenbwroten9813 How many times will you continue to misrepresent and misunderstand atheism? We tell you in every thread, multiple times over that atheism isn’t a religion, a cult, or worldview.
JMikes analogy also implies that Jesus was a carpenter of "magical" sandcastles.
No 🔨 time.
@@ajclements4627
It is intellectual dishonesty in motion, the Grey rock method works very well against such people.
Honestly as an Atheist I have no idea what kind of evidence would convince me 1. Of the existence/relevance of any God/s, or
2. That I should be worshipping this god in any capacity.
If theists want to convince atheist's of the existence of all the Gods they've dreamed up throughout human history, they've done a pretty poor job.
Why can't they just be content with the billions of brainwashed folks they've already fooled?
I have no idea either. Every single theist claim or argument that I've ever heard seems incoherent or nonsensical, in addition to being utterly unsupported by even the most ordinary sort of evidence.
But that's not really the point of investigation anyway. The matter would simply not come up for discussion if theists didn't raise it in the first place. Apparently THEY have evidence which was enough to convince them. So if they want us to take an interest, they're free to share their evidence, and we're free to decide ON THAT BASIS if it convinces us also.
We didn't show up with the claim. So how on earth would we have been convinced of it enough to raise it for discussion? It makes no sense.
It would be like someone coming up to you on the street and asking you to give them the rules for judging a flea circus, so that they could show you their flea circus and you could decide if it won some contest for best flea circus.
What? Who is old enough to even remember what a flea circus is? And why would you care? And how is it up to you to come up with rules for judging them? Let the flea circus people sort that out, and stop bothering everyone else.
If a god was real you would just know. The “evidence” would be evident.
@@starfishsystems Pretty much exact words I would have said, except last 2 redundant paragraphs.
Decades ago when I first heard a Christain provide their _reason_ to believe, I honestly thought they were joking.
Now some many thousands of Christain testimonies later, I think their reasoning and _evidence_ is even worse.
It's like church 'leaders' (Lol) are now straight out instructing them with absolute illogical irrational (and extremely incoherent) lines of reasoning.
Not too long ago I heard a theist say (and this is common).
The reason why I believe is because when I was a boy I had a dream of a white horse riding past, and then a man sat down next to me and it was Jesus! (Although they can't remember if he was black or white).
I replied: That doesn't make sense!!!!!!!
Have you completely lost your damn mind?
The best answer I could come up with:
-If God is all-knowing, then he knows how to convince me
-If God is all-powerful, then he is able to do what would convince me
-If God wants me to believe in him, then he will do what would convince me
@@kennybachman35 and the evidence wouldn't need apologists to lie about it.
The exact same evidence that would make a Christian believe in Zeus would make me believe in their god.
The Problem Atheists have is they unnecessarily overcomplicate it
God is simply the existence of Love.
That’s what we Follow.
Everybody Believes Love exists.
To deny that fact is not only Unfortunate
It’s Shameful
@@damianedwards8827 LOL, no, that's not at all what you think or follow if you're a Christian. Maybe you're a "Lover" or some new religion that simply believes that the feeling of love is a god, but that's a different issue. You seem to want to use words in your own way. Fine, but don't expect us to know what you mean or agree with you.
@@ChrisM-zm4li Haha. You Obviously don’t TELL me what I Follow
You ASK me
@@damianedwards8827 I don't have to ASK you, you TOLD me. I'm saying that you are TELLING me nothing though.
@@ChrisM-zm4li Hold on. You just said Love means nothing to you?
Your bulidling construction tool analogy is fantastic...
When a theist asks what evidence an atheist would accept as proof of a god, to me, that's the equivalent of asking : "why don't you believe the same nonsense as I do ? "
I used to be a Jehovah's Witness. The reason I left and become an atheist is because I wanted proof. There is no proof in religion. What it comes down to, is you believe what you want. I kept asking questions and got back these pigeon-hole answers. JWs are famous for answering a question with a question.
I like the caller is trying to figure stuff out and admitting when he doesn't know stuff. I wish more callers would have this insight.
“Hey Johnny, what evidence do you want?”
“Whadda you got?”
@@youhaveaGodregardlesscreature Do you mean “creatures” or “created”? How do you know God did it?
This video is titled "What evidence are atheists looking for?"
The question presupposes atheists are actually looking for evidence which is obviously a false premise.
@@youhaveaGodregardlesscreature Your first sentence doesn’t seem to make any sense, common or otherwise. As for the rest, how do you know God is the source? How do you know there is any “source”? How do you know that creatures cannot develop intelligence and awareness by themselves? You are just making wild assumptions about things we don’t know.
@@melchior2678 I’m pretty sure some atheists have looked for evidence.
@@ookeekthelibrarian But not those horrible iced finger buns.
I was shocked they didn't open up with the most famous question of all. "Which God?"..
Which god is irrelevant when they can’t prove ANY god exists.😈
The other God...
I think they mean the God of Bible.
@@FourDeuce01 i mean yeah, we get that but *_they don't._* ASKING about it however, might make them realize: "Great and remarkable things, in art, and literature, and culture, and community, have happened in the name of Vishnu, and there can't be any concrete evidence of Vishnu since as you just said: there can't be any concrete evidence of 'a deity' -- so are you willing to believe in Vishnu based on just that 'standard' of evidence?"
@Christopher Chamberlain Fwiw, Forrest did touch on that point, briefly... at 7:05.
If I hear "hoofbeats", I'll assume that it's just someone knocking coconuts together until I have evidence otherwise.
Are you suggesting coconuts migrate?
@@presidentskroobdid you miss the "someone" in their post?
@@cy-one I take it you never heard of Monty Python
@@presidentskroob love them.
If God appeared to the world and apologized for every horrible act he ever made happen, and was able to tell me what I prayed for when I was 10, I'd believe in him, but I would still refuse to worship him.
How would you know that it was God? As for telling you things that are know to you, how would you conclude that you weren't remembering the information and just imagining that you were experiencing the God-thing?
Just asking how you would resolve those.
God would know what kind of evidence would convince unbelievers. That he hasn't presented any means one of two things:
1 He's not inclined to present any, in which case he's good with torturing unbelievers in his special hell - but he loves us!
2 There is none.
Of the two, no evidence being available is the more likely.
And theists hate both.
Well, they always say stuff like "Look at the trees!" and "Look here now, I got this book...."
"A Catholic can go into any church and be accepted." How many LGBTQ people in the audience had a cynical giggle at that statement?
@@cajunking5987 LOL - what's curry powder got to do with making curry?
@@cajunking5987 I think you need to watch the video. I was quoting the the contents - not your personal beliefs.
@@cajunking5987 No it's not. Would you prefer that I write in Mandarin? Or like most westerners, are you a monoglot?
@@cajunking5987 I sincerely doubt that. 🤣😂
@@wordscapes5690 there’s no helping some 😂😂😂
Just show me _something_ that makes the God hypothesis _necessary._ So far, I ain't seen anything yet.
They try with Kalam
If you are trying to control?It is a control tool.🧰⚒️
@@jamesparson Kalam is so bad.
That's science: show me something that couldn't be true without God.
@@darrennew8211 your double negative is confusing
If I could only see one miracle, just one miracle. Like a burning bush, or the seas part, or my uncle Sasha pick up a check.”
- Woody Allen
I’d like to see it knock up another virgin. 🤣🤣
There’s so much amazing art and music based on religion because they could afford to pay for it.
🎯
Yes, at the time of Michelangelo and Leonardo Da Vinci the Catholic Church was the only entity that was paying for art. Besides the money aspect, anyone who is a devote believer can be inspired to do great things in the name of what they believe in. If you create great art or music because of your belief in a God, that certainly does not provide any evidence that a God exists. George Lucas had a strong belief in a story about Jedi Knights fighting a battle in space against the evil forces of Darth Vader. George's vision created or inspired a movie franchise of 12 films that have been highly acclaimed as an art form and been embedded into popular culture. George's commitment to the character of Luke Skywalker is not evidence that Luke Skywalker exists.
Where I live they had a really profitable scam going in the middle ages: Farmers would will half their property to the church in return for going to heaven. So more than half the fields, farms and woods around here ended up belonging to the church. God times!
@@tzenophile Here in Sweden, the former state church ("Svenska kyrkan" Church of Sweden) still owns 2 % of all the farmland, and 2 % of all the forests. Historically this was called "priest salary property".
The farmers had to donate a piece of land each to be able to create a congregation, and that land was meant to pay for the priests upkeep.
@@Asa...S A smart way of getting enough priests out in the countryside rather than stay in the nice big city where they studied.
As i keep repeating to them :
"If God truly exists, and is as powerful as you claim, then in order to convince me, he should know how and where to find me."
I'm very easy to convince with proper evidence...
What good would that do for God to come and find you? You are going to go around telling everybody that God came to you and then you will be locked up in a mental hospital. That idea, my friend will not work.
@@bmoshareholderappleshareho855 Religious people make these claims constantly. Most religious people will make these claims. It should be cause for concern about mental health but sadly its widely accepted in society
The beauty (paintings/ music) that came out of religion was because in those times the church alone had the money to commission those works.
I can tell you this much, there's no evidence of your god's existence to be found anywhere in that Bible. I'm 40 years old, and I have never once seen, heard, or experienced anything in my own life that would convince me that any god exists outside of fiction.
No existence in the Bible...
No existence outside of it...
Obviously God likes a hail mary
I'm 80. Nothing yet
Yep, sixty here !
Dude what an awesome analogy with the skyscraper.
Appreciate the honest conversation.
A christian asking an atheist what evidence they are looking for to believe in god is like a prosecutor asking the jury what evidence they are looking for to get a conviction. Would you accept DNA? Would you accept finger prints? Would you accept video surveillance? Would you accept the murder weapon found in the defendant's possession?...
....Well, I don't have any of that, but IF I did then you'd be sure to issue a guilty verdict wouldn't you? I rest my case.
@@youhaveaGodregardlesscreature Really? How do you know this? 🤔
@@youhaveaGodregardlesscreature Wait, what? I don't understand.
@@youhaveaGodregardlesscreature And who do you think my "god" is, troll? 🤣
@@BootBizarre your gods are popular atheists like Christopher Hitchens. It's obvious.
@@melchior2678 Wrong! Try again troll. 🤣
My general answer to this question is first, “Which god?” since that’s pretty important.
Often I just flippantly say, “What evidence do you have?” since I take the question as an weak attempt to avoid the burden of proof.
Don’t ask me to help you to prove your god exists.
I usually ask "define 'god'," since ultimately, without a definition, their question is meaningless. Besides, the specific details of the definition are important: if the definition is unfalsifiable, then it is impossible that any evidence exist to prove its existence.
0:43 there's already the first problem of the caller: if there's evidence, you don't have to believe. As soon as there is evidence you don't have to have faith, it's proven reality.
If there is evidence, we don't have to believe in a god, we know he/she/it/whatever is there.
I would want him to speak to all mankind from the clouds and make a show, or visit me and tell me something about myself no one could know.
The point at around 5:00 with the hammer is a good one in my opinion. Look how far we've come in the last 200 years with science when religion brings mankind nothing. No progress, no new knowledge, nothing.
they ask different questions. and address different fields of knowledge Science asks questions “a posteriori” in a very narrow and very specific field related to natural philosophy. Metaphysics by contrast addresses questions 'a priori' that science cannot, nor ever will ever answer.
Science uses 3rd person objectivity. Metaphysics precedes this rational with introspective 1st person subjectivity.
it is a mistake of science advocates to insist that philosophy has no value, when science procedes after philosophy.
Likewise, it is a mistake for religious proponents with in philosophy to attack science methodology.
@@kylekataryn3454 This is false. Metaphysics including the beginning of time and space can absolutely be answered by science.
@@kylekataryn3454 What question has philosophy ever answered?
How about It making a worldwide telepathic announcement that It would make the moon spin at exactly 3.1415 RPM for seven days and seven nights starting right now? Hey only the blind would doubt.
@@chromolitho there you go, worldwide telepathic prediction of something that couldn't be fulfilled on purpose.
"TOO many people have died in the name of CHRIT for anyone to heed the call"
Crosby, Stills and Nash
It’s frustrating hearing callers like Brian because you know he’s not an idiot. It’s just religion has a strong hold on so many people that they can’t seem to let go no matter how logical they are with anything else in life, with religion the special pleading takes charge.
"What kind of evidence would you need?"
Anything. Literally any evidence at all. Even just a single piece of evidence would cause me to re-evaluate my position. And yet, after 2,000 years there is still nothing.
The real question is, "Why is blind faith enough for theists?"
If a 50 lb bag of cheetos appears at my feet right now, I'm in.
Before or after consumption?
@@tschorsch 🤮🤮💩🤮💩🤮.
Jaysus you dirty scutter bucket.
Why did you have to plant that image in my head?
And 50lbs of the stuff?
I'd even take 1 lb. Cheetos rock.
Surely all lottery jackpot winners globally would become theists if Wotsits is the Base rate. We call cheetos Wotsits lol
You're hungry for cheetos? How high are you right now?
For me it will always come back to the fact that a god, if he is omnipotent, knows exactly what would convince me.
He, if he is omnipotent, would also know how to avoid alternative explanations like, for example, an advanced alien species.
Almost 30 years. Still waiting.
Omnipotent mean's all-powerful and omniscience mean's all-knowing just so you know.
@Stone Dragon
The point I was making is that if this God is omni-everything he should know exactly what is necessary to convince me that he is real.
@@fpcoleman57 there are many deities who are not considered to be omnipotent, usually in polytheistic traditions. Atheists rarely if ever attack polytheistic traditions though because they used whatever intellectual capacity they had on their attempts to destroy Christianity.
@@melchior2678
I live in a "Western" country. The reason why I "attack" Christianity is because that religion has been and continues to have the largest historical and cultural influence on the society in which I live. In my country it is still the state religion and affects the laws and other decision making activities of those in power. In the United States anyone who wants to attain high office must at the very least express a nominal belief and go to church. The predominant influence of religious teachings on people's lives is huge. If I lived in a majority Islamic or Hindu country I would behave in the same way as I do with Christianity with those religions. In my country Islam is a minority belief but has a disproportionate effect on the daily life of non Moslems and therefore should be challenged as well. For that reason I also "attack" Islam. If Christianity had never been more than a minor sect of Judaism and the Roman pantheon of gods was still the largest belief system I would be challenging that instead but history turned out differently.
@@fpcoleman57 Hmmm I find it super interesting that you say that Christianity is in fact only a sect of Judaism, yet you focus your attack on a mere sect rather than the overarching religion of which you say it is a part. Hmmm I wonder why that is.... 😎
I don't have an active belief that there are gods, but having read the BuyBull, I am firmly convinced that the Abrahamic god, whether you want to call it YHWH, Jehovah, Allah or whatever is a logical contradiction and the probability that it exists as described in the BuyBull approaches 0%. Yes, religion has changed History in dramatic ways. The problem is that the bad changes vastly outweigh the good.
Absolutely! The bible itself is irrefutable evidence that the tribal war g0d of Abraham cannot possible exist!
I challenge any basis you think you have. Provide it in detail?
@@borthwrenblanston6632 LIAR Powers you should tell your lies about your 2nd law of STUPIDITY.
@@borthwrenblanston6632 Looks like you really enjoy biting the pillow Powers.
This one has always been easy for me. What kind of evidence would I need? I have absolutely no idea. You know who would though? This God character. If he was out there he would know exactly what evidence I'd need and would be fully able to provide it. Here I wait.
What I'm looking for is an impartial, unbiased process of determining which God claims are correct while excluding all competing God claims.
That's funny. You'd actually admit a certain God exists?
You know the death threats against god were real...
Doesn’t look like you’ll get that from this thread.
@@jayrose8638 Sure seems like it, but I can't say I'm surprised.
@@borthwrenblanston6632
He did not.
What he asks for does not require God to exist. Only the procedure he asked for.
If someone claims there's a Lochness Monster, I want to see at least a non-blurry photo. 🙂
The ability and willingness to stop all the wars, hunger, oppression?
maybe it's even easier not to start them.
The more religious a community is, the further I want to live near that community.
You want to live near that community, or far away?
Do you mean "...from that community"?
Pretty sure you broke the time/space continuum with that comment Sean. 😂😂😂
Presumably they mean "farther", even then it doesn't work..
So you want to live away from education 🤔
😆 🤣 😂 😹
I liked JMike's point about the houses and skyscrapers... what results can theists/spiritual types and other magical thinkers show they have attained as a result of their practice? It's all just "fake it 'til you make it" without any of them ever "making it" as far as I can see.
"Live a good life.
If there are gods and they are just, then they will not care how devout you have been, but will welcome you based on the virtues you have lived by.
If there are gods, but unjust, then you should not want to worship them.
If there are no gods, then you will be gone, but will have lived a noble life that will live on in the memories of your loved ones."
-Marcus Aurelius
"Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful."
~Lucius Annaeus Seneca
The marbles example is actually quite good.
If you think about it: what’s the difference for the person that is taking out the marbles one by one, what colors are inside the bag if the only marbles he takes out are blue?
Even if there are marbles of different color he will still take out the blue ones! So effectively for that person only the blue marbles exist!
The same way until the god or any supernatural thing doesn’t effect our reality they are effectively nonexistent!
For me if the God can make a human out of clay right in front of me and the (made) human can be examined and confirmed to actually be a human, that would be pretty impressive.
I could do that light work 💪💯
I have noticed that this, "What evidence would convince you that there is a god?" is the latest apologist fad.
It is frequently used as a type of thought reform. The questioner is asking, sometimes openly, to imagine there is a god. They are then asking for the evidence that will get you to believe in this imaginary god. The process, if you engage with it, then continues with them getting you to see your imaginary god as their imaginary god with imaginary evidence to support it, until it belief can be developed. In open discussion, this technique is dishonest at best, however, if the questioner has some degree of control over the environment of the listener it is a form of victimisation.
How is clarifying what evidence would convince you dishonest? This is nonsense.
Just answer with "I don't know but an all powerful, all knowing god would know".
@@billsherman1565 Try this, what evidence would convince you the Tooth Fairy actually exists?
Think carefully about this. You are the one demanding evidence so you need to tell me what evidence you require.
@@billsherman1565 because that's not how evidence and belief work. Easy.
@@freakyzed8467 What are you talking about? That is exactly how it works. If I'm talking to an antivaxxer, and cite the mountains of evidence for vaccines, and then they go "Well that doesn't convince me, but idk what would." They're not being reasonable for one, but they're also being absurd by pretending that they would ever change their mind! It's inadvertently admitted you don't think your claim is falsifiable.
If god spoke to me and told me the winning powerball numbers 3 times in a row.
That would probably be enough for me
Science told me to buy Tesla Motor shares back then when they were $39 a piece... I never looked back.
How did you rule out a timetraveler? Or undetectable pink flying micro elephants?
I did a similar test with the belief that horoscopes predict your personality. My coworker believes this.
I asked how well do you know my personality? I will answer any question, that I believe provides information about my personality, omitting birth date related information. Then if you can guess which horoscope sign is mine, then I will become surprised and be more inclined to believe your future predictions.
Within Christianity, that style of reasoning is typically discouraged. At least in my experience.
@@mesplin3 So you omitted half of the test?
@@Angelum_Band what would be the other half?
Religion is truly a way of escaping reality and using faith as a crutch with no evidence to back up their God claims.
Humans evolved to see the beauty in the nature of the world. Humans have also evolved to see the ugliness in the nature of the world. If the nature of trees were different, we would have evolved to see them differently.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, there is indeed, no objective standard.
Just imagine what a dung beetle thinks is beautiful!
The evidence I would require would be such that it would be convincing.
But I don't dictate what that would be BEFORE I evaluate it. I don't think of it in terms of "you must present THIS to convince me", because that places limits on what can be presented and evaluated. I'd rather allow the theist to present the best they've got, then I'll evaluate it and see if it's convincing...but if I were to decide what would be convincing before I see it and evaluate it, wouldn't that be sort of poisoning the well?
Overall, I think this guy was a pretty honest caller. He seemed patient, polite and willing to engage with some tough questions. Cheers!
Forrest bringing up that going back in time he would be perceived as a god to people with no concept of our technologies. This has happened on more than a few occasions and it’s documented too. People from a more technologically advanced culture interact with people without those technologies and the latter create myths or start to worship them and it has been observed in return trips too. When you don’t have a concept of a technology it’s hard to grasp, you don’t have the language for it so you create mythological explanations
Great conversation...
So once a theist actually provides indisputable evidence of the existence of deity, now the bigger mountain would be providing an actual acceptable reason to worship said deity.
The “great art and music because of religion” is an old claim that completely ignores the fact that the church had the WEALTH to PAY for that art and music.
For four years of painting the Sistine Chapel, Michelangelo was paid the equivalent of 2.9 million dollars.
It is easy - observations that are recorded and repeatable. Measurements that can be tested by anyone. A mathematic model that explains how things happen. Since supernatural things are not consistent with all known physics, so there would need to be a model for how that can be, the particles and forces that operate there, and how it can interact with the physical universe, and what evidence there is for that interaction, and how to observe and record it.
That is how evidence works.
_Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic._ -- Arthur C. Clarke
I would thoroughly impressed with walking on water, sticks turning into snakes, the night of zombies accompanying an resurrection. Those things seems not happen anymore. Paranormal phenomenons related to consciousness are not totally ruled out, so predictions don't do it form me. There is correlation outside the light cone.
Just ask if it needs a Star-ship?
My first question would be “why do you want me to worship you?” How narcissistic is “god” that he created beings so they could worship him? Imagine having children just so they could worship you their whole life? 😢
That was a good conversation with a good caller
Brian has not travelled in Ireland, where religion definitely did NOT bring people together. Or Jerusalem. Or India.
As Hitchens once asked in a debate (I have lost the exact quote, so I must paraphrase), "Explain for me the secular roots of anti-semitism".
Brian seems like a nice guy but he could be a professional cherry-picker!
I’ve always thought the “look how much good religion does” argument for god(s) very strange. And it just gets stranger the deeper you look.
On the surface level, I can’t imagine anyone sincerely making the argument is unaware that religion has also been associated with harms. They may believe that _humans_ caused the harms by _not_ following the faith properly. They may attribute those harms to _other_ religions than their own. They might argue that those same harms would’ve been even worse without religion. A few bold people will even argue that those weren’t harms-that the Albigensian Crusade and attempting to beat the gay out of people are good things. But none of those arguments (except the last) do anything to mitigate the harms, and at best you’re still left with “God(s) let people do these bad things in their name”.
And at the second level, there are non-theistic religions, both animist and atheist. Maybe it’s just a hole in my knowledge of history, but I don’t recall anywhere near the level of death and destruction associated with any of them that is associated with most of the theistic religions. So at this level the “religion is true because it does good” argument looks to me like an argument against a god-centered religion.
And another layer deeper, let’s say that someone makes a truly convincing argument that religion (one of them or all of them) has done more good than harm. Or convinces us that so much of the good people have done as part of religion would not have been done without it, but the evil would’ve happened (if in slightly different form) anyway. That, as this caller said, religion is a massive boon to society. That’s _still_ not an argument for God or for divine inspiration. In fact, it’s an extremely persuasive argument that religion is so valuable to society that it needed to be invented whether or not there are gods or spiritual beings or souls or an afterlife.
Stated in a stronger fashion, I would argue that if religion truly is such a boon to society, the societies that invented it would flourish and the ones that didn’t would die out, be conquered/assimilated, or be out-competed. And so _if_ it were such a boon, religion would arise naturally without any need for God to explain it. “Religion builds societies” isn’t just not an argument for the deities that religion generates being true; it’s an argument that the existence of religion _can’t_ be an argument for the existence if those deities.
I want evidence that isn't contradictory, not forged, doesn't have translation issues, a book with known authors, a coherent timeline, concrete dates for the writings, is historically possible, scientifically possible, and a god that actually shows up and proves it can create a universe from nothing.
2:28 this is a logic argument I've spent some time racking my brain with "If something comes up to you and claims to be god, how do you know it is not the devil?"
The devil is a stand in for anything with powers (intent, intelligence, reality bending, ect) sufficiently superior to yours that you can't use normal "well turn water into wine" arguments to dismiss the claim. It's about figuring out the intent, not just if this thing is powerful.
Closest thing I've come to an answer is asking it to pray with you, i.e. ask it to perform an act that something without "pure intent" would not be able to do. However I think anyone reading this can see the many many ways that wouldn't work.
If there really was an 'all-loving, all-knowing and all-powerful' god. Then we would 'ALL' believe in this god. And that is certainly not the case.
The building analogy is very precise and usable. A bunch of theist standing in the next building lot claiming their building is going up also but we just can't see it so we have to trust the elevator or the stairs that don't exist now who looks crazy
An amputee regrowing a limb in front of me might do it for me.
Would it count if he sends Jesus to heal my liver and then turn all my storage water into wine?
@@DoctorZisIN Only if the wine is a fine vintage. Not that $5 WalMart crap.
Suddenly getting all the Powerball numbers each week for a month might change my mind.
@@thatguyrich9822 What good is being the omnipotent lord of the Universe if all you can afford is WalMart box wine? Then again they're always asking for money at church. Hmm...
Paraphrasing: “Doesn’t the evidence dilemma take God completely off the table?”
In my head: Yes, the attributes that we give God is thus far incompatible with evidence. That is the whole point!
J.Mike and Forrest V, did great on this call!
Oxymoron: "Critical thinking Christian"
Oxymoron: critical thinking atheist
@@melchior2678 Another oxymoron: honest theist.🤤
@@melchior2678 whats non critical about atheism?
@@melchior2678 you just copied Jim’s line and switched Christian to atheist. That is a very classic Theist action; To steal ideas and twist them to your liking
How about young Earth scientisy?
Just turn my 20,000 gallon tank of rain water into a fine wine and I'm all yours! 🍷🍷🍷
Same here, but he would have to heal my liver first.
I'm sure there are many who could turn a tank of wine into water.
I have a better miracle find an lgbtq ukrainian Azob.
'What kind of evidence?' Well ... any .
I loved Jmike's skyscraper analogy. Absolutely brilliant.
You don't need an apostrophe in "Atheists"; it's a plural noun, not a contraction nor a possessive noun.
These two are becoming a rather formidable team
Great piece from that show. Hits the perfect points.
And Dilihunty siad it best. I dont know what would co convince me but god should..
God could come to earth and tell us about himself. Oh wait! Jesus already did that. God could give us a book; sort of an owners manual concerning his creation. Oh wait! God already did that w/ the Bible. It looks like you're all out of excuses, pal.
🥱 Get new spam NEP.
@@owersmenbwroten9813 Jesus wrote the Bible. I never knew that.
@@owersmenbwroten9813 no idea what you smoke but i never met a Jesus. Yet alone some jesus that could proof he was a god.
All I have is a book full of obviously fictional stories
@@owersmenbwroten9813 jesus never existed. It is called Christian Mythology. The Buy Bull is a book of superstition and mythology mixed with fairy tales and nonsense written by Bronze Age men who didn't even know where the sun went at night. Could you be any dumber?
Just give Matt's pat answer: I don't know, but your gawd presumably would know what evidence would convince me.
I actually don't think this is a good approach, it just kindof ends conversation. Imagine if this was any other issue. like If i was trying to convince a religious person that theism was a drain on society, and I sent what I thought was tons of evidence. Then they go "Im not convinced, and idk what would convince me" there's no point in engaging at that point.
@@billsherman1565
If the conversation isn't being initiated in an honest fashion, I don't see an issue with shutting it down.
@@Diviance How is asking clarifying questions not honest? Please elaborate?
@@billsherman1565
Their intentions are dishonest. They aren't asking the questions for honest reasons, it is all to try to lead you down a script.
How is that honest?
I would have to meet him and see a miracle or two!
And if I did I would be pissed off if he could stop the starving children, took away cancer from children but as I find he doesn’t do it he is nota god of love. Emperors new clothes.
Every scenario including yours tells me it’s too late. And if a god appeared after all of the cruelty and suffering in this world, it doesn’t deserve any respect from human kind.
My miracle detector might be broken.
@@TrumanSparx Yea, for me it's like, even if someone could prove god exists, at this point, given all I have been told about god, I would not want a relationship with him anyway, so it will never matter to me one way or the other.
When I was a kid in school, we had this substitute teacher. She spent a lot of time talking about God. She was telling us this one story about a little girl who lost a tooth. The little girl prayed and prayed and the tooth grew back. It seems like people who believe in God are not very smart.
And, as the caller said, that "higher power" could be an alien being. And, any being with greater power that humans *would* be a "higher power". That still gives me no reason to worship it or even like it. If it does good, that's great! Still, no reason to worship.
Evidence? Bring my fave grand-dad back to life.
Invite Brian back for more conversation. The 3 of you did a great job of looking at possibilities.
I for one would rather be ignorant than to be misinformed.
Again thanks for the sober non emotional conversation.
Brian was great, but I don't think they'd get much more from him.
But I could be wrong.
Ignorant? There's no need to be ignorant; to not KNOW! But WE DO KNOW. It’s much worse than you “DON’T KNOW.” All your atheist ideas (e.g. big bang, abiogenesis, evolution) have been proven to be IMPOSSIBLE. They’re certainly never OBSERVED. YOU CANNOT KNOW the supernatural by natural means. YOU CANNOT KNOW the creator, by trying to find him within the set limits of his creation. Scientifically, the metaphysical cannot be known and thus, science has it's dangerous limitations concerning your eternal destiny. That said, let's look at what we do know: The high-complexity/high function designed/creation we find in the READY TO REPRODUCE human being, is IMPOSSIBLE to have come by CHANCE via the MINDLESS UNGUIDED processes of atheism (big bang, abiogenesis, evolution). Furthermore, LIFE the we clearly see in the world, is IMPOSSIBLE to come by CHANCE from the MINDLESS UNGUIDED processes of atheism (big bang, abiogenesis, evolution). Furthermore, INTELLIGENCE that we clearly see in the world, is IMPOSSIBLE to come by CHANCE via the MINDLESS UNGUIDED processes of atheism (big bang, abiogenesis, evolution).
Our living intelligent G0D IS THE ONLY POSSIBLE OPTION for LIFE, INTELLIGENCE & THE HUMAN BEING'S EXISTENCE. Because why? Because whoever did design/create the high-complexity/high function found in the READY TO REPRODUCE human being, has intelligence, resources and power FAR BEYOND that of mankind (G0D). WE DO KNOW (Romans 1:20), so much so that we are ‘WITHOUT EXCUSE” not to know that God exists.
2 comments are being censored.
@@owersmenbwroten9813
The only thing we know is that God doesn't exist.
@@Angelum_Band
You can't even be correct about something so simple. All comments are visible.
lol, worthless troll
Very simple for me: I think of a number. You pray to god and ask him what the number is. If he gets it right, and if this works every time someone tries it, I would admit to a supernatural force which can read thoughts. It would be a start. Now you may think God would not reveal to you the answer every time. You would have to find a true prophet up to the task. And how do you know who is? And who would step forward? I would guess nobody. Or they may say God wouldn't give such a sign, but how do they know? In Bible stories god gives signs to unbelievers all the time! And if you can't think of anybody capable or willing to reveal such simple answer, how can you trust any preacher who claims to know god's will?
Well, it could also be something that can travel through time. Or phase through objects. Or is simply insanely lucky.
@@Diviance Sure it could be, and I know that the existence of an all-knowing, all-powerful being is the ultimate improbability, but It would be a start. I don't want to be completely closed to the idea of changing my mind because that's the religious domain, an absolute conviction. Reason's domain is the willingness to change with the evidence presented.
@@Diviance GIVE ME PROOF THAT YOU ARE NOT GOD OR IF YOU ARE THAT RELIGIOUS MEANS GOD IS. YOU HAVE NO EVIDENCE ATHEIST OR THEIST EXISTS...YOU TALKING, SAY YOU ARE NOT WHAT THE OCCULTIST MEANS A GOD IS AND YOU ONLY SAY YOU ARE A ATHEIST. I DONT KNOW! PRESENT YOUR EVIDENCE... WE DONT KNOW WHO WE ARE... PEOPLE WHO SAY THEY ARE ATHEISTS OR THEISTS ARE NOT CREDIBLE... EXACTLY... O! MY! GOD! I APPRECIATES WHAT YOU TOLD ME...
That’s a good last question. Where else do we use faith, rather than experiential?
Romantic love is a lot like religion. I trust my partner of many years based on evidence, but when we met, it was purely on faith. I felt it as strongly as any religious experience. And on the first few dates, it’s all a gamble if it will work out. I felt it in my heart, not my head, that I could trust her forever. That’s a huge amount of faith.
Does that qualify as an answer to your question?
Regardless of how you experienced love, it’s still just chemicals influencing your brain, and these can be demonstrated by science.
You are simply using faith in 2 different ways. You trusting your partner when you forst met is not the kind of faith you are using to have faith that God exists.
This is why I think faith should be divided into secular faith and religious faith. Secular faith tends to be belief in something because of observations/evidence, religious faith tends to be belief in something despite no evidence or even evidence to the contrary.
Eg. Secular faith: You have faith that you can trust your wife, because you have observed throughout your time together that she loves you, and has never given you a reason to think that she has or will cheat on you.
Religious faith: people believe that we were designed and created by God, when there are numerous features such as vestigial limbs/organs, genetic diseases, cancer, mental illness, the recurrent laryngeal nerve, viral DNA within our own, etc etc, that a designer would be pretty stupid to include. If we were designed, that designer is incompetent.
@@chriswebster839
I like the word confidence.
But also an important point is the person willing to give up the belief in question.
@@stephenolan5539 that's true, if the person in question admits there is nothing that could make them change their opinion, then they've fallen victim to a cult mindset and there probably isn't much hope for them.
Sorry, me again. I often hear folks saying "the beauty of nature" is enough proof of god. Well, yes, nature is beautiful, because that is what we want to see, but I also know that nature is a constant struggle for survival. All animals and plants are in constant battle, if you will, trying to feed their young by killing something else that is also trying to survive. Is that beautiful? Is the fly in the spiderweb saying "Wow, what a beautiful view there is from here!" Silly, I know, but still.
The caller says that beautiful art comes from religion? That is a lie ! The art comes from the sciences! Like painting is because of the invention of paint and pigment! And sculpture is because of metallurgy having metal that is harder than the stone being carved is huge! People have to attribute the right thing for the advancement of humanity!
I made sure I was by myself in my bedroom and sincerely asked god with all my heart that he would turn the light off and on again. I got nothing.
Surely it would be a sinch for an omnipotent, omnipresent, all loving and all powerful god to flick that switch. It would also stop me from instilling doubt in a lot of christians minds. He clearly doesn't give a shit or more likely just doesn't exist.
If any theists read this and say, "god didn't flick the switch because you're not a true christian" I implore them to try the same experiment before commenting and tell me how it went.
You know some believer will say they did and leave out the fact that there was a thunderstorm in their area screwing around with the electrical grid lol.
That's a long way of saying you didn't want to get your lazy ass outta bed.
@@ajclements4627 Haha for sure man or just flat out lie for jebus.
God spoke with Adam & Eve, and most of the profits. I’d be convinced if I had several conversations with the voice of god. Or a conversation with an angel. If god wants to know me, let him introduce himself to me.
I’d still get a CAT scan.
I remember an episode of Sanford and Son, where Fred decided to start a church to make money. It was called "the Church of the Holy Profit." (I think you meant "prophet")
Never can really trust cats.
@@bobbyb9712 Took me a minute…lol thanks!
Saul the creater of the Catholics had direct evidence so why can't we?
I love, love, love the Building Metaphor! Amazing
I thought it was Peter who created christianity but actually it was the Romans who created catholicism.
One of the main problems with an evidence based arguments for a god is that god itself is so fuzzily defined that it’s impossible to do. But that isn’t a problem on the side of atheism….
16:30 tightly knit also means it's a us vs them, sure it's nice that they like each other but the reason for it is because they fear/don't like the rest of the world
It's more about division than unification
JMike has powerful magic hair! 🤣🤣🤣 Love ya JMike and hope you’re no longer stressed out about your school exams/tests/papers, or whatever it was that you were stressed out about last week concerning your school work, but I’m sure you did well.
Evidence of god? Well if amputees had limb’s grow back, new eyeball’s for blind people, no more terminal illnesses, no more starvation, homelessness, no more war, and suffering, etc, etc, etc…..then I’ll believe in a god!
Love love love you too Forrest…you’re a fucking scream!!! I love your humor! 🌹🌹🌹🌹🌹
I love what Forrest said, god would know what it would take to change his mind but god has chosen not to do it! Nice comeback Forrest!
THE BALL IS IN GOD’S COURT! ⚽️🏀🏈⚾️🎾🏐🏉🥎 RIGHT JMike…Take me to Lowes or Home Depot so I can find shit to build my shit! 🤣🤣
Ahhhh Roland the closet goblin and I just went out on a date for dinner and a movie…he’s hot!!!
How come I’m the only one who still believes in Santa Clause? He’s coming soon so you better be good! 🎅🏼🎅🏼🎅🏼🎅🏼
Definition of faith….Gullibility and also pretending to know thing’s that you know nothing about. 🤣🤣🤣🤣 I love being an Atheist!!!
Statistics have proven that there are more divorces in religious communities than there are among Atheists….go figure.
"Powerful magic hair"
TRANSLATION: woo woo neckbeard
Yes Santa Clause is coming very soon. He knows when you are sleeping, he knows when your awake, he knows if you've been naughty or nice and just about everything about you. Why have I been writing letters to Santa for almost seven decades, if already knows what I want for Christmas? Next year, I'm going to save the stamp.
When I used to be JW, a JW member was going around telling people, "I prayed to Jehovah to furnish me a wife and he furnished me a wife. You see, Jehovah does answer prayers." The guy was making 40K per annum in the year 1983. That's like somebody making 160K per annum in today's dollars. I guess with a salary like God really felt that he needed a wife. Based on that story, I guess God does exist because he answered that guy's request for a wife. No, there is no god. By the way, did I make you laugh?
@@chrisgraham2904 the hell with Santa Claus. Try asking the Easter Bunny for lots's yummy chocolates.
@@bmoshareholderappleshareho855 The problem there is I don't have an address to write to for the Easter Bunny and I'm not sure he can even read. The last I heard, the Bunny was sleeping on the Tooth Fairy's couch.
Why are gods always referred to as -"He"?. Seems like the patriarchy ruled 2000 years ago
There are many goddesses too, my favourite is Cardea goddesses of hinges.
The Abrahamic deity has a Y chromosome apparently.
Have you never heard of Aphrodite, Minerva, Amaterasu, or Kali? And there are many more in the Goddess club. You’ll find them all over the world.
@@ari1234a A practical girl. Without her we’d only have sliding doors.
@@robinharwood5044 Yea she Cardea, is very benevolent goddess, or so they have told me, she also guarded against evil spirits and did not let them in, for a certain price i assume.
There was also Portunus who was god of locks.... Soo aa i think they worked together....Or something
None, have no interest in God, waste of time.
Amen 🙏
😆 🤣 😂 😹
That hammer analogy was great.
Edit: also, Jmike, you said [someone] could _be_ rest assured, but (as you probably already noticed) it's their _rest_ that can be done while assured (of whatever proposition's truth).
So you don't need the word "be," but you may have just misspoken.
Anyway, I'm fucking baked. It took me like a half hour to type that.
If I didn’t know better I would think that jmike was doing the dirty man challenge from the Knocked Up movie, lol
The God Christians believe in could easily provide evidence of His existence that would convince even the strongest non-believer. I don't know exactly what that evidence would be, but that God would know without question.
The claim is that He and Jesus want all of us believe and to follow. Why wouldn't He come out of hiding?
How silly the whole debate is.
I hazard a guess that when the scientists pin down how the universe, and life, came about, the answer will be something no one has even thought of so far. I think that answer will have nothing to do with anything supernatural.
The real question is whether or not we will survive bombardment by asteroids long enough to fully understand the cosmos. Perhaps. We're gaining ground.
In my opinion, the fact that in the Christian religion their deity wants me to believe in it... knows how to accomplish that goal and has the power to do it instantly, with no effort, at _any_ time and there is nothing that could possibly prevent him from doing so and _I still don't believe..._ well, that fact is convincing enough, for me, to say that their God must not exist.
@@Diviance Bravo! I see it just the same way.
My question is with a god that powerful, why did he even allow evolved primates to “interpret” his message, deciding what’s “holy” or not, and why are those particular primates so shite at arguing and presenting evidence?
if david blaine was in jesus time, who would be look like a god.
Evidence for a god should be a god itself, we do not have this...
I would make one observation to that caller: Nobody has ever produced any falsifiable evidence to support the existence claim of any god in the last 5,000 years.
And .. . falsifiable evidence has the properties of measureability, repeatability and predictability.
Did JMike get a raise? He is talking a lot more now..