JRobin (Agnostic?) Knows The Truth!

แชร์
ฝัง
  • เผยแพร่เมื่อ 28 ก.ย. 2024
  • I guess JRobin is an agnostic now? Anyways HE KNOWS THE TRUTH!
    Please like, comment, share, and subscribe for more amazing videos!
    Join us at discord.gg/politics for more great conversations!
    #religion #christianity #islam #metaphysics #buddhism #christianphilosophy #christian #islamic #metaphysical #morality #moral #ethics #kalam #philosophy #physics #science #quantumphysics #epistemology #ontology #apostasy
    Greg Bahnsen, Cornelius Van Til, Presuppositionalist, Presuppositionalism, Presuppositional Apologetics, Kalam Cosmological Argument, Science, Agnostic, Agnosticism, Epistemology, Ontology, Physics, Quantum Physics, Necessary Being, Necessary Existence, Evidentialism, Evidentialist, God, Gods, Argument, Debate, Religion Debate, God Debate, Bible, The Bible, Quran, The Quran, Shroud of Turin, Evolution, Abiogenesis, Argument For God, Argument for Religion, Apologetics, Ignosticism, Metaphysics, Metaphysical, Discord Conversation, Discord, Philosophy, Philosophical, Philosophical Discourse, Theology, Theological Discourse, Noah's Ark, The Great Flood, The Ark, Religion. Argument Against Religion, Arguments Against Religion, Determinism, Free Will, Catholic, Apostasy, Apostate, Evolution, Evolutionism, Evolutionist, physicalim, physicalist, Kent Hovind

ความคิดเห็น • 126

  • @youarevictoria4981
    @youarevictoria4981 หลายเดือนก่อน +13

    "How can I see something that is not physical..." exactly.

    • @realBreakfasttacos
      @realBreakfasttacos  หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Great point!

    • @Dizerner
      @Dizerner หลายเดือนก่อน

      I only believe in things I can see, like black holes.

  • @Rev-bb9ej
    @Rev-bb9ej หลายเดือนก่อน +8

    The reverse presup troll is the gift that keeps on giving. 🤣

  • @jasonblackmore8904
    @jasonblackmore8904 หลายเดือนก่อน +8

    I saw a jrobin video, and i just had to turn it on and watch. He's amazing at accepting premises that destroy his worldview. Then, when it's explained how it does that, he backtracks and claims he never said that, it doesnt ’t mean that, or asks whats the argument for that?
    I havent watched this yet. Did i get it right? Lol.

  • @ottomaddoxx5360
    @ottomaddoxx5360 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    JRob should have continued to remain silent on the internet, instead of jumping on after having quit for a while. I thought for a second he might have gotten some sense into him. It was a bad idea for him to try to get back into this stuff.

  • @kevinaviles30
    @kevinaviles30 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    0:45 My question is a theist would assert that their “special” revelation comes from god. From a naturalistic perspective where would you receive the “special” revelation from? I get that taco is using the presup argument against these Presup theists, but just curious about that thought I had.
    I also think I understand the argument that if god reveals himself through our senses and reasoning and the theist has never seen god or any supernatural being or thing then the theist is admitting supernatural beings or things do not exist…I think…any one feel free to correct me if I got it wrong, ty

    • @realBreakfasttacos
      @realBreakfasttacos  หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Special revelation is just reason silly.

  • @Weirdaman
    @Weirdaman หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Literally broken, hahaha, he went into a loop. Hahahah. Gj.

  • @LookOutForNumberOne
    @LookOutForNumberOne หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    JRobin was the old puppet from Darth Dawkins

    • @MattSingh1
      @MattSingh1 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      *He was demolished a number of times by KingXerxes.*

    • @realBreakfasttacos
      @realBreakfasttacos  หลายเดือนก่อน

      Yes he was!

    • @realBreakfasttacos
      @realBreakfasttacos  หลายเดือนก่อน

      Xerxes is christian now.

    • @davids11131113
      @davids11131113 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Jrobin about a year ago said he’s moving on from being a ridiculous presuper, he said he needs to get on with his life…but now he’s back here doing presup garbage so I guess he failed at getting on with life.

  • @dbt5224
    @dbt5224 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Christian presupps are clearly not of sound mind.

  • @Boneworm852
    @Boneworm852 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    I think you're cool. 😎

  • @smolderingtitan
    @smolderingtitan หลายเดือนก่อน +11

    P1: My ability to reason comes from the existence of God.
    P2: I am unable to reason.
    C: God does not exist.

    • @Pinworm
      @Pinworm หลายเดือนก่อน

      More evidence that everyone is born an atheist and remain one until indoctrinated. Babies and toddlers cannot reason.

    • @realBreakfasttacos
      @realBreakfasttacos  หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      Great point!

  • @JeffersonSpatchcock
    @JeffersonSpatchcock หลายเดือนก่อน +5

    JRobin saying he’s agnostic about God’s non-existence is a lie and a devastating admission that he may have been grifting for Jesus for years. 🤔

  • @Qzopr1
    @Qzopr1 หลายเดือนก่อน +8

    Having "JRobin" in the title is reason enough to pass on the video. His ignorance is only surpassed by his smugness. I'll try but make no promises. Thanks Taco.

    • @realBreakfasttacos
      @realBreakfasttacos  หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      LOL

    • @littlefurrow2437
      @littlefurrow2437 29 วันที่ผ่านมา +1

      Yeah... it's the ONLY reason I viewed it.

    • @andreaskarlsson5251
      @andreaskarlsson5251 3 วันที่ผ่านมา +1

      He was the most decent person in the room for once. 😂

  • @benlinus1310
    @benlinus1310 หลายเดือนก่อน +6

    The infinite regress is not a formal fallacy in philosophy as far as I know. Even so, wouldn't God have the same problem?

    • @realBreakfasttacos
      @realBreakfasttacos  หลายเดือนก่อน

      Great point!

    • @smolderingtitan
      @smolderingtitan หลายเดือนก่อน

      What could I read to understand whether infinite regress is a fallacy or not?

  • @bertthompson4748
    @bertthompson4748 หลายเดือนก่อน +8

    Its so funny when an apologist is broken out of being the one asking the questions and suddenly find a sense of humour and sarcasm

  • @wilberforce1826
    @wilberforce1826 หลายเดือนก่อน +7

    So weird how, when faced with presup that proves them wrong, they become a caricature of what they think atheists say and start asking "what's the argument for..." about literally every word.

    • @realBreakfasttacos
      @realBreakfasttacos  หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Very good point!

    • @vex1669
      @vex1669 19 วันที่ผ่านมา

      The "Jordan Peterson Defense".

  • @andreaskarlsson5251
    @andreaskarlsson5251 3 วันที่ผ่านมา +2

    Didnt think I would see the day where Jrobin was the rational person in the room. 😂

  • @realdjungleskog
    @realdjungleskog หลายเดือนก่อน +4

    One of the funniest things about these guys is that they have no sense of irony or self-awareness. I heard one of them (not Jrobin) say, at one point, "It's like talking to a bot." They're THIIIIIS close to getting the point.

  • @TheGlobuleReturns
    @TheGlobuleReturns หลายเดือนก่อน +4

    ‘Prove it’ was a trend/game some people at my school used to play where they just kept saying that to everything and the other person would try and keep answering until it was impossible. Who would have thought years later it would become a dead serious and unironic tactic to defend the existence of god on discord.

  • @FRMurOWNopinion
    @FRMurOWNopinion หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    Taco, I think your catch phrase of “why do you want to be a main character in the battle of good vs evil so badly” is pretty cool

  • @rafaelallenblock
    @rafaelallenblock หลายเดือนก่อน +4

    Here is Darth Dawkins proof: p1If AAAAAYtheistic NAAAAAturalistc ReALLLLLllllity exists then we would be able to reason. p2 We are able to reason therefore conclusion AAAAAAAAAAYtheistic NAAAAAAAAAturalistic ReAALLLLLLLIIIiity exists. Checkmate.

    • @babotond
      @babotond หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      shouldn't p1 be more like if AAAAAYtheistic NAAAAATuralistic reAAAALity didn't exist, we wouldn't be able to reason?
      because otherwise it's affirming the consequent.

    • @rafaelallenblock
      @rafaelallenblock หลายเดือนก่อน +4

      @@babotond That's the whole joke: DDs arguments, despite being corrected multiple times, revolve around affirming the consequent. Google "Darth Does Logic" and enjoy

    • @babotond
      @babotond หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      @@rafaelallenblock my mistake, sorry
      lol

    • @derkylos
      @derkylos หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      @@babotond Affiliating the consistent, you mean, surely?

    • @babotond
      @babotond หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      @@derkylos i said what i said, and don't call me shirley.

  • @JeffersonSpatchcock
    @JeffersonSpatchcock หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    JRobin is not fairing well here.

  • @Altitudes
    @Altitudes หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    This is what they do...

  • @dbt5224
    @dbt5224 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    I’ve heard JaneRobin talk before. Forget impressive, it’s incoherent.

  • @luisbenitez9892
    @luisbenitez9892 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    11:05 why do you run away and yap when someone has a actual point against your point and you just mute him? I wanted to hear you refute him. And you just kept ignoring his questions. What kind of debate tactic if this?

    • @realBreakfasttacos
      @realBreakfasttacos  28 วันที่ผ่านมา

      It's called hyper focusing JRobin.

    • @luisbenitez9892
      @luisbenitez9892 28 วันที่ผ่านมา

      @@realBreakfasttacos it also called Running.

    • @lightbeforethetunnel
      @lightbeforethetunnel 20 วันที่ผ่านมา

      ​@luisbenitez9892 Muting interlocutors ensures fallacies can't be invalidated.

  • @vex1669
    @vex1669 19 วันที่ผ่านมา +1

    I am low-key amazed that he seriously doesn't get your point.

  • @koki84ji7
    @koki84ji7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Robin is still going? Gets shit on for years and years but dude is still going 😂😂😂😂😂😂

    • @realBreakfasttacos
      @realBreakfasttacos  หลายเดือนก่อน

      Yes he is! Sounds like he's Agnostic now.

  • @Ryan-ww5xt
    @Ryan-ww5xt หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    You remind me of a character from office space… i am adverse lol however i love your atheistic presup so ill suck it up and enjoy your awesome content

  • @seawolf7649
    @seawolf7649 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    LOL --- I like the catch phrase "main character in the battle of good and evil" JRobin attempted to balk at.
    Imma use that one now.

  • @babotond
    @babotond หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    this is not even bad faith, this is rotten, moldy, cockroaches-wouldn't-touch-it faith
    jfc

  • @BarrySchanz
    @BarrySchanz หลายเดือนก่อน +4

    You can't handle the truth 😱

  • @smolderingtitan
    @smolderingtitan หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    JRobin's presupp past comes home to roost.

  • @jonparker5728
    @jonparker5728 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Jrobin is back?
    Oh no🥲

  • @Dizerner
    @Dizerner หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    You just baldly assert your own perceptions have to be 100% accurate and your own reasoning is 100% perfect, then you unjustifiably attribute perfect morality to your own estimations, then you hijack language to bolster your feeling of certainty like "revelation," then you just badger and insult and kick anyone that disagrees with you.
    That is not a "logically valid" argument.

    • @KEvronista
      @KEvronista หลายเดือนก่อน +4

      here's a logically valid argument for you:
      p1: that which occurs at no time and no place is that which never occurs.
      p2: creation of the universe ccurred at no time and at no place.
      c: creation of the universe never occurred.
      :)
      KEvron

    • @realBreakfasttacos
      @realBreakfasttacos  หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Inductive arguments cannot be logically valid silly. Hope in discord and I'll deconvert you real quick.

    • @KEvronista
      @KEvronista หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      @@Dizerner
      *"anyone that[sic] disagrees with you"*
      jrobin agreed with him.
      KEvron

    • @13shadowwolf
      @13shadowwolf หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      Reality is Self-Evident and Self-Revelatory.
      "god" is neither Self-Evident, nor is "god" Self-Revelatory. Theists have had thousands of years stringing together nonsense gibberish and claiming they have created "arguments" for their "god"
      Without the Thousands of years of Traditions of Accepting Nonsensical Gibberish as "truth", Theism would be treated the same as Scientology.

    • @Dizerner
      @Dizerner หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@13shadowwolf If reality were self-evident and self-revelatory, why does anyone ever have a wrong opinion about it? Why don't you naturally realize through reason and sense that matter is mostly space? Why does it take further deduction and data to learn that your perceptions are actually deceiving you?
      Turning it back to theist mistakes is just changing the topic to get out from under the heat. I think theists make the exact same mistakes, so it's irrelevant.