Every time man. That's why I stopped believing. They got nothing. It's all one big confidence game (and, perhaps, some sort of weird Daddy fixation? anyway)
Atheism is rebellion against God. That atheism becomes pathological when the atheist continues to lie to themselves over and over against about true reality. Like it or not, a rock didn't come from a bang, get wet & produce the human being over time. NOTHING like that or similar to that is POSSIBLE. But this is the type of garbage the atheist lies to themselves about until they start to believe that the IMPOSSIBLE is POSSIBLE. NOTHING of the atheist cult can be SCIENTIFICALLY DEMONSTRATED/OBSERVED IN REAL TIME (e.g. big bang, abiogenesis, mistakes (mutations) gaining in complexity/new information, new anatomy differing from ancestry/evolution) as TRUE NATURE is SCIENTIFICALLY DEMONSTRATED/OBSERVED IN REAL TIME (e.g. flower bloom, reproduction, photosynthesis, digestion, respiration, top down production, gravity, sunshine). The atheist cult is nuked by just this one paragraph.
@@quotedotes "THEY GOT NOTHING!" Screams the lost and clueless atheist that thinks star dust, moist rocks and mud puddles have the INTELLIGENCE, POWER, PURPOSE, RESOURCES AND MEANS to create/design LIFE, INTELLIGENCE, LOVE, CONSCIOUSNESS, MORALITY, the human being and ALL the co-existent bodily systems (circulatory, respiratory, reproductive, pulmonic, digestive, skeletal, muscular, nervous, body (skin), etc., etc.) intertwined in co-dependent order in the human body :) Atheism is pure idiocy.
@@quotedotesI would say the weird daddy fixation comes from the atheistic humanist. A man who is a homosexual is way more likely to identify as an atheist humanist. Atheism is a disbelief which means it's an unwillingness or inability to accept God it's logically repulsive. And humanism is complete garbage
"If reality, without your help, does not convince a person of the self-evident, he has abdicated reason and cannot be dealt with any further". -Leonard Peikoff- Objectivist
There's something worse than both of those things. And that's having an imaginary brain that doesn't fit your body which makes you who ever you think you are your own worst enemy. Atheist humanist have the craziest believes that lead to so much devastation. Not Only to themselves but their children
Or an imaginary soup. Atheism is rebellion against God. That atheism becomes pathological when the atheist continues to lie to themselves over and over against about true reality. Like it or not, a rock didn't come from a bang, get wet & produce the human being over time. NOTHING like that or similar to that is POSSIBLE. But this is the type of garbage the atheist lies to themselves about until they start to believe that the IMPOSSIBLE is POSSIBLE. NOTHING of the atheist cult can be SCIENTIFICALLY DEMONSTRATED/OBSERVED IN REAL TIME (e.g. big bang, abiogenesis, mistakes (mutations) gaining in complexity/new information, new anatomy differing from ancestry/evolution) as TRUE NATURE is SCIENTIFICALLY DEMONSTRATED/OBSERVED IN REAL TIME (e.g. flower bloom, reproduction, photosynthesis, digestion, respiration, top down production, gravity, sunshine). The atheist cult is nuked by just this one paragraph.
@@jamesparson "IMAGINARY!" Screams the lost and clueless atheist that thinks star dust, moist rocks and mud puddles have the INTELLIGENCE, POWER, PURPOSE, RESOURCES AND MEANS to create/design LIFE, INTELLIGENCE, LOVE, CONSCIOUSNESS, MORALITY, the human being and ALL the co-existent bodily systems (circulatory, respiratory, reproductive, pulmonic, digestive, skeletal, muscular, nervous, body (skin), etc., etc.) intertwined in co-dependent order in the human body :) Atheism is pure idiocy.
Yeh, the whole drama a few years back really hurt TAE. Its never been the same. TAE went corporate and a little too focussed on merch and some kind of hypersensitivity about... things :(
Belief is just the state of being convinced. Theists are convinced that God exists. I’m not. Period. That’s Atheism. The hardest part of Atheism is convincing people that it isn’t anything more than that.
Hats off to them for their patience with callers like this. For me, listening to these calls is like enduring a root canal. When they can't defend their beliefs, they pivot to complaining about Atheism. It's like watching someone try to juggle with one hand-painful and pointless.
Fr 😂 I am amazed at the level of patience. I would lose my mind on my very first day! It's like they get the same call over & over & over. They handle them though, and that's amazing to me.
@@DulceN Atheism is the only position I know of that doesn't require a brain. If you replace the brain of an agnostic with a rock you do the same thing with somebody who believes in God and an atheist what you would end up with is 3 atheist because they wouldn't have the willingness or ability to accept God..
People like him have a religion which convinces them that they have all the mysteries of the universe figured out, and anyone who doesn't buy into their baseless garbage is just a stupid poo poo dumb dumb head
Especially his line about them rejecting the Christian god and not serving them how they were made to do. That was just dripping with arrogant condescension.
Teaching children religion should be classified as child abuse. I would prefer that children be taught that slavery, racism, genocide, sexism, incest and homophobia are all immoral and illegal. When these children are adults then they can be exposed to the immorality contained within the bible.
Child Abuse is defined as, "physical maltreatment or sexual molestation of a child," by the Oxford Dictionary. By definition, JUST, reaching religion inherently doesn't do this.
According to theists, atheism is idolatry and a religion. Because not worshipping anything is clearly a form of worship and not having faith in any gods is a religion, of course.
Atheism is a religious cult; rebellion against God. That atheism becomes pathological when the atheist continues to lie to themselves over and over against about true reality. Like it or not, a rock didn't come from a bang, get wet & produce the human being over time. NOTHING like that or similar to that is POSSIBLE. But this is the type of garbage the atheist lies to themselves about until they start to believe that the IMPOSSIBLE is POSSIBLE. NOTHING of the atheist cult can be SCIENTIFICALLY DEMONSTRATED/OBSERVED IN REAL TIME (e.g. big bang, abiogenesis, mistakes (mutations) gaining in complexity/new information, new anatomy differing from ancestry/evolution) as TRUE NATURE is SCIENTIFICALLY DEMONSTRATED/OBSERVED IN REAL TIME (e.g. flower bloom, reproduction, photosynthesis, digestion, respiration, top down production, gravity, sunshine). The atheist cult is nuked by just this one paragraph.
It would be such a better show if the show with higher hosts that actually believed the origins of Life came into existence without God this way there could be a decent debate But since atheism is a disbelief it's an unwillingness or inability to accept God and these hosts don't actually believe the origins of Life came into existence without God. It makes for a terrible debate. They want you to convince them that God exists meanwhile they don't have the willingness or ability to accept it and at the same time they don't actually believe the origins of Life came into existence without God. On top of that they don't even want to admit that atheism is a disbelief it's an unwillingness or inability to accept god. But at the same time they want to say atheism is whatever we say it is they also want the default position lol. You can't have it both ways you can't say atheism is whatever you say it is and you always have the default position. Atheism is the default position specifically because it's an unwillingness or inability to accept God its position as nothing to do with evidence it's a bias. Some atheists will claim that atheism is a belief that God doesn't exist. And again they'll claim but I still have the default position I have no burden of proof lol.
@@ChildsRightToLife why would anyone waste time “believing” that? We have no need for that hypothesis. Go and get some evidence for your beliefs and present them - _that_ would make a better show…
@@bestbehave *why would anybody waste time believing ,that* Are you talking about the atheist humanist beliefs about their children being born in the wrong body. Or about their beliefs that their ancestors were sea creatures or their beliefs that life can just pop into existence because of a non intelligent occurrence. You're going to have to be more specific. I think the worst of their beliefs is the idea that children are born with a brain in their body that doesn't match their body because they end up cross-dressing and mutilating their children because of that belief . The question is why would anybody have a disbelief AKA an unwillingness or inability to accept something as true regardless of evidence. Sorry but atheism is intellectually repulsive and humanism is morally repulsive.
"I don't have a problem with ignorance. We are all ignorant about a variety of subjects we are not currently aware of. The real problem is when that ignorance is wilful, intentional and used as a weapon against anyone who disagrees with you, or anyone who has the nerve to present facts you don't want to accept." - anyone who actually cares about verifiable reality "The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt.” - Bertrand Russell
It never ceases to amaze me how theists don't understand what atheism is, when it simply means I don't accept your claims that a god exists, how hard is that to understand.
We know what stupidity (atheism) is. Atheism is rebellion against God. That atheism becomes pathological when the atheist continues to lie to themselves over and over against about true reality. Like it or not, a rock didn't come from a bang, get wet & produce the human being over time. NOTHING like that or similar to that is POSSIBLE. But this is the type of garbage the atheist lies to themselves about until they start to believe that the IMPOSSIBLE is POSSIBLE. NOTHING of the atheist cult can be SCIENTIFICALLY DEMONSTRATED/OBSERVED IN REAL TIME (e.g. big bang, abiogenesis, mistakes (mutations) gaining in complexity/new information, new anatomy differing from ancestry/evolution) as TRUE NATURE is SCIENTIFICALLY DEMONSTRATED/OBSERVED IN REAL TIME (e.g. flower bloom, reproduction, photosynthesis, digestion, respiration, top down production, gravity, sunshine). The atheist cult is nuked by just this one paragraph.
@@brantsonoverton1367 Ok obviously you are mentally ill, but even you should understand that nothing you said has anything to do with atheism. Let me help you: Theist: I believe that there is a god who made his own virgin mother pregnant with himself to sacrifice himself to himself because a woman made out of ribs was told by a snake to eat a magical fruit. Atheist: Ok?! Do you have any evidence for that claim? Theist: No Atheist: Yeah sorry I am not able to believe that. And that´s all there is to it.
Deeply ingrained religious beliefs formed in childhood can create a mental block against considering alternative viewpoints. This can lead to a strong resistance towards atheism, which some misinterpret as the active denial of a god's existence. This misunderstanding fuels anxieties about abandoning their faith and a misplaced burden of proof placed upon themselves to convince atheists, a seemingly impossible task.
@@murali-alive You could very well be right, but I was in the same boat when I was young, my mother was very religious, and I was brought up that way and to believe in a god, but reading the bible saw me starting to question the existence of a god, and I did have to struggle somewhat with my beliefs at the time, and it took a while before I could deny gods existence outright, thankfully now though I'm free of the tyranny of the Christian god.
I was curious about what Stanford said, and it literally starts with: "The word “atheism” is polysemous-it has multiple related meanings. " And this dude just ignored that part to pick the one definition he wanted to fight...
Part of being a Bible believing Christian is believing words don't change and can't change meaning. If he finds a definition he likes, he thinks he has found the Capital T Truth
The SEP also tries to argue atheism in an extremely dishonest way. It tries to force atheism into “accepting no gods exist” which is a separate claim. It also tries to argue that no atheist has fully considered every definition for god which is absurd and tries to put the burden on atheists to prove what god actually is to be able to hold the belief gods don’t exist which is also absurd.
My web search could not find a "Stanford Dictionary of Philosophy". I did find a Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. I looked up atheism, and this is the first few sentences of the entry I found: The word “atheism” is polysemous-it has multiple related meanings. In the psychological sense of the word, atheism is a psychological state, specifically the state of being an atheist, where an atheist is defined as someone who is not a theist and a theist is defined as someone who believes that God exists (or that there are gods). This generates the following definition: atheism is the psychological state of lacking the belief that God exists.
The entry continues to talk about alternate definitions, including the proposition that there are no gods. So the caller is either forgetful or disingenuous to claim that the reference contradicts AXP's definition of atheism. The caller should have acknowledged that there are multiple definitions of atheism, and then accepted that the hosts were using a certain definition rather than denying that their definition is listed in his reference.
Yeah the wording at the conclusion of this is popular (even among many atheists), but I stopped using this "lack of belief in" or "lacking belief in" years ago because the word 'lack' is generally interpreted to signify something is missing that ought to be present… that something is 'wrong' or amiss. I replaced it with "absent a belief in" or "absence of belief in" because it feels more accurate to me.
This part was subject to a subtle change in 2022, when the contributor included the fancy word _polysemous_ as philosophers must use kant to exclude mere middling minds from _The Amalgamated Union of philosophers, Sages, Luminaries and Other Professional Thinking Persons_ . However, the article goes on to say "In philosophy, however, and more specifically in the philosophy of religion, the term “atheism” is standardly used to refer to the proposition that God does not exist". To claim a negative of an unfalsifiable claim is irrational, so philosophers of religion must be irrational; but we already knew that. As we atheists far outnumber philosophers it is _our_ usage that prevails, so philosophers should p155 off and get back to their armchairs..
The negative of "guilty" is "not guilty", which is different from "innocent". The negative of "I believe a god exists" is "I don't believe a god exists", which is different from "I believe no god exists". It's really not that complicated.
@@nealjroberts4050 I agree. But there's some cause for this confusion, since people sometimes (wrongly) reason by analogy with algebraic negation. It's a good reminder that reasoning by analogy is always a tricky business.
I know where you're going with this you're talking about the atheist humanist compelling speech when it comes to gender. And that's the argument you're trying to make just come out and say it. say
@@TheLevantin just because you become emotionally triggered by somebody else's words it doesn't mean they're trolling you. If you don't like new accounts talk to your fellow high estrogen male atheist and tell them to stop crying to TH-cam every time they get triggered by another man's words. I'm guessing that you're a member of the tribe and you don't like me to talk about metzitzah jobs and the Talmud. I know let's see, will you denounce metzitzah jobs , your refusing to do so tells me all I need to know about you
@@lidbass we both know if I was a child you and the rest of the atheist humanists adults would be trying to hook up with me.. Right now you would be trying to entice me to meet up at some kind of drag queen story hour event at the library
@@johnsperry9494 I'm a theist myself and it annoys me. However it is a good indicator that someone doesn't argue in good faith and will likely be dishonest on other things.
Yea, because I always wonder what's this atheist doctrine we're supposed to follow? How are us atheists even supposed to know what we're supposed to believe as atheists since we all pretty much are supposed to believe the same things? A lot of theists do this and with other things like the burden of proof, because we do it to them on occasions but they don't recognize the blatant differences. Theists, especially Christians, have a book and traditions supposedly given to them by their god which tells them what they're supposed to believe and do, we don't.
If you look to the Lord of the Rings, that is physical evidence for the existence of Gandalf. It's Gandalf's revealed word. Christian reasoning. I am SO sick of them.
We should all thank all of the theist trolls for commenting and helping the ACA with the TH-cam algorithm. They are convincing nobody with their BS while driving ACA engagement. Thanks, guys!
textbook call in. one of my favourite things is to watch the face of a theist when you tell them / correct them that an a-theist could technically be a deist. it's like when you put the wrong punch card in one of those old computers
If you can't see the blinding effects of your own religion, then the religion is working on you. All Brojo has is , "But the bible says..." or "Atheists believe that..." While not understanding what an atheist is.
Have You seen an avatar episode where TWO tribes are talking though a cannyon. And both were warning bot to bring food, but because they don't like each other both brang food because they belived the other tribe would do it anyways??? This is brojo usual plan. Project everything on his religon onto others.
STOP with the stupidity already. Atheism is a religion. A religion of “SELF.” Instead of properly worshipping God and putting him first in your life; YOU PUT YOURSELF FIRST. EVERYBODY HAS A FAITH. It’s just that your faith is stupid. Atheism tenets (e.g. big bang, abiogenesis, mistakes (mutations) gaining in complexity/new information, star formation, evolution) I debunk w/ ease. 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 LOL The God of the Bible is the one true God and Jesus is the only one God the Father has ever raised from the dead. When you reverse finite nature (time/space/matter) all the way back to non-existence, you have “NOTHING” in regards to finite nature (time/space/matter). The “infinite density” of the big bang can’t exist, BECAUSE INFINITE CAN’T EXIST IN THE FINITE. And since the needy finite exists and can’t self-create, it had to be created IN IT’S BEGINNING by a non-created “non-needy” infinite G0D/prime mover/uncaused first cause. The universe is not eternal, so there MUST be something outside that is. Being that time/space/matter was created, their cause has to be outside time/space/matter and thus the creator is timeless, spaceless and immaterial. We know G0D is a person, because he created persons, an impersonal force can’t make a choice. Only a person can make a choice, and choices by G0D were made. Now we need to discuss the actual RATIONAL POSSIBLE cause for creation: The God of the Bible is the one true God and Jesus is the only one God the Father has ever raised from the dead. There can only be one infinite being: 1. An infinite being lacks nothing. 2. For 2 beings to differ, one has to lack something the other has. 3. A being that lacks something, is not infinite. 4. Therefore, there can only be one infinite being. 5. An ultimate being has no potential, because the potential is maxed out. Therefore, it’s a contradiction to say there can or should be more than one infinite being. That would erroneously state that a finite being is not maxed out potential and another one is needed to reach full potential.
6. To say this infinite being is the Christian G0D, we go into the historical evidence of Jesus and his Word. It is patently obvious there can only be one supernatural first cause/prime mover/God. Atheism is rebellion against God. That atheism becomes pathological when the atheist continues to lie to themselves over and over against about true reality. Like it or not, a rock didn't come from a bang, get wet & produce the human being over time. NOTHING like that or similar to that is POSSIBLE. But this is the type of garbage the atheist lies to themselves about until they start to believe that the IMPOSSIBLE is POSSIBLE. NOTHING of the atheist cult can be SCIENTIFICALLY DEMONSTRATED/OBSERVED IN REAL TIME (e.g. big bang, abiogenesis, mistakes (mutations) gaining in complexity/new information, new anatomy differing from ancestry/evolution) as TRUE NATURE is SCIENTIFICALLY DEMONSTRATED/OBSERVED IN REAL TIME (e.g. flower bloom, reproduction, photosynthesis, digestion, respiration, top down production, gravity, sunshine). The atheist cult is nuked by just this one paragraph.
@@benjaminmadrigalperez9010 No, it is more like that in brojos head there are only two options. Either he is right or the others are right, so when he can proof that the others are worngtha3t makes him right automatically.
Short answer: I am not convinced God exists Long answer: I don't think there are holy books I don't think the existence of a God can be established via a book I don't think people can speak for God I don't think people can collect money for a God I don't believe in supernatural things I don't believe in life after death I don't believe in magic words I don't believe in the power of prayer I don't believe prayer is anything more than silent mumbling I don't believe my parents had good reason to believe I don't believe that "In God We Trust" has magic powers But I do believe the collection plate is real.
"I have no pie." "No pie is still a pie. I just means you have none. Have means you retain a pie. It's just that the pie you have is not there. I have a pie, but you BELIEVE you don't just because you have no pie." "Where is your pie? I don't see yours, either. Show it to me." "I have a pie. Just accept I have a pie the same as I believe I know you don't believe you don't have a pie."
He's lying about the Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy - I've just checked. It doesn't provide its own definition of atheism - it examines various different definitions from different sources.
Just once I’d like to hear a caller support their own claims, rather than tear apart someone else’s claims. No one particular religion is the default option compared to atheism. Creationism isn’t the default position compared with evolution. Support your claims!
Not sure, but if he is he hasn't learned to string together a lot of words that sound intelligent and profound but are anything but (like Dawkins and his minions are famous for).
He strikes me as being someone who has been told what atheism is by other theists and has never bothered to ask atheists what they believe. His entire argument seems to be built on this complete misunderstanding of atheism, which is why he is floundering.
I don't claim there are no gods. It would be foolish to claim to falsify an unfalsifiable position. However, I would bet every cent I own that a god will never be demonstrated over a reasonable finite time, and I'm not a gambler. I would do the same for leprechauns and the tooth fairy. If you want to know how confident a person is in their assertion, ask them to put money on it. That's when you really find out what they believe.
superstition - noun 1a: a belief or practice resulting from ignorance, fear of the unknown, trust in magic or chance, or a false conception of causation b: an irrational abject attitude of mind toward the supernatural, nature, or God resulting from superstition 2: a notion maintained despite evidence to the contrary Merriam-Webster
How doe Brojo conclude that atheists have a different lifestyle? Apart from the fact that I don't waste time (in my view) on sundry magic rituals, my lifestyle is substantially the same as anyone else's. I'm curious what he thinks is different?
Strictly speaking, not accepting the assertion that a god exists is not in itself a claim. It is, rather, a rejection of the positive claim that a god does exist. This is an important distinction. Because you're not making a positive claim but merely rejecting one, you assume no burden of proof. However, if you claimed to know there is no god, you would be taking on a burden of proof. And by so doing, you would be committing an error in logic because "there is no god" is not only a claim to knowledge but one that is unfalsifiable. You don't believe in a god (that's the atheist part) but you accept that you can't say for certain that no god exists (the agnostic part). This renders you an agnostic atheist, which is the only logical position among the four possible (agnotic atheist, gnostic atheist, agnostic theist, gnostic theist) to take on this issue. Good on ya, mate!
@@stefanbjarnason251Not true. The claim is "I don't believe". That is a claim about a person's inner state. It's as irrefutable as a theist's claim that they do believe. Atheism, unlike theism, isn't a claim about external reality. Theism is really two separate claims: "I believe in one or more gods" and "One or more gods exist in reality". That's why they have a burden of proof for the second claim.
@@scottjohnson7248 Interesting take. However, I would argue that you're committing a category error by characterizing "I don't believe" and "I believe in one or more gods" as claims. Whether true or untrue (one could be lying) these are not claims in the sense we're talking about here -- namely, assertions requiring validating evidence. They're simply declarations of fact regarding one's state of mind.
@@scottjohnson7248 Confused? No. I'm simply drawing attention to your overly broad application of the term "claim" to include statements that don't fall into the category of assertions that require evidence for validation. You seem to suggest that the original commenter referring to his disbelief in gods as a "claim" somehow lends validity to that characterization. It doesn't. By your lights, virtually anything anyone might say about their internal state -- I'm hungry, I'm bored, I'm feelin' fine -- can rightly be called a "claim" which, while perhaps acceptable on a conversational, colloquial level, muddies the water when the concept of claims is central to the topic under discussion.
"Hey there *Atheist Community of Austin,* I know you guys are kind of amateurs when it comes to atheist terms and phrases. No worries, I'll clear them up for you-after all, I run a _discord server_ so I'm kind of an expert" THE H E A U D A C I T Y U D A C I T Y
"Reminder that "Brojo" is Canadian Catholic." As a Canadian that has always been disgusted by "Canadian Catholic" this is absolutely false. Baseless assertions just to prop up a narrative... Not even once... "If you hate something, don't you do it too.” - Eddie Vedder "Not for You" "The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt.” - Bertrand Russell
It blows my mind the number of people who think they can prove "X" by disproving "Y". Maybe in a Sherlock Holmes universe where there are a finite number of known possibilities, but it seems pretty clear that our real universe is full of infinite possibilities, likely only a very small percentage of which are known or even perceptible (including possibly one or more "gods"), so assailing other possibilities does nothing to promote your claim that yours is correct. I will forever love Bertrand Russell for this: "What is wanted is not the will to believe, but the will to find out, which is the exact opposite." I'm sad to say that I have never found a devout believe whom I could engage rationally. I'm almost convinced that that part of the mind must be turned off (permanently or selectively) to accept religion wholly. Also, the better rebuttal to that guy saying, "then atheism (a-theism) is the opposite of the belief in a god", might have been, "no, it's only the lack of it"
How difficult is it to understand that an atheist doesn't believe a god exists? One answer to one question. It's not a series of beliefs. I don't believe in Santa, that doesn't make that a world view.
Wait. So you're an asantaist? Alrighty then. We santaists now know for a fact that your world view is based on the hatred of statutory holidays, white beards, in-house trees, jolly laughter, fluff-lined jackets and gift-giving.
The God of the Bible is the one true God and Jesus is the only one God the Father has ever raised from the dead. When you reverse finite nature (time/space/matter) all the way back to non-existence, you have “NOTHING” in regards to finite nature (time/space/matter). The “infinite density” of the big bang can’t exist, BECAUSE INFINITE CAN’T EXIST IN THE FINITE. And since the needy finite exists and can’t self-create, it had to be created IN IT’S BEGINNING by a non-created “non-needy” infinite G0D/prime mover/uncaused first cause. The universe is not eternal, so there MUST be something outside that is. Being that time/space/matter was created, their cause has to be outside time/space/matter and thus the creator is timeless, spaceless and immaterial. We know G0D is a person, because he created persons, an impersonal force can’t make a choice. Only a person can make a choice, and choices by G0D were made. Now we need to discuss the actual RATIONAL POSSIBLE cause for creation: The God of the Bible is the one true God and Jesus is the only one God the Father has ever raised from the dead. There can only be one infinite being: 1. An infinite being lacks nothing. 2. For 2 beings to differ, one has to lack something the other has. 3. A being that lacks something, is not infinite. 4. Therefore, there can only be one infinite being. 5. An ultimate being has no potential, because the potential is maxed out. Therefore, it’s a contradiction to say there can or should be more than one infinite being. That would erroneously state that a finite being is not maxed out potential and another one is needed to reach full potential.
6. To say this infinite being is the Christian G0D, we go into the historical evidence of Jesus and his Word. It is patently obvious there can only be one supernatural first cause/prime mover/God. Atheism is rebellion against God. That atheism becomes pathological when the atheist continues to lie to themselves over and over against about true reality. Like it or not, a rock didn't come from a bang, get wet & produce the human being over time. NOTHING like that or similar to that is POSSIBLE. But this is the type of garbage the atheist lies to themselves about until they start to believe that the IMPOSSIBLE is POSSIBLE. NOTHING of the atheist cult can be SCIENTIFICALLY DEMONSTRATED/OBSERVED IN REAL TIME (e.g. big bang, abiogenesis, mistakes (mutations) gaining in complexity/new information, new anatomy differing from ancestry/evolution) as TRUE NATURE is SCIENTIFICALLY DEMONSTRATED/OBSERVED IN REAL TIME (e.g. flower bloom, reproduction, photosynthesis, digestion, respiration, top down production, gravity, sunshine). The atheist cult is nuked by just this one paragraph.
@@brantsonoverton1367 Oops. You've revealed yourself to be a typical theist: One who fails to comprehend the critical distinctions among these three concepts: claims, facts and evidence. But don't feel bad. In order to sustain those comforting, evidence-free beliefs, you really have no choice. Now off to the prayer tent with you.
When it comes to a few key "trigger" words, there seems to be a tendency among religious fundamentalists to adhere to only one, very rigid definition and very often, it's not the definition most commonly-used. Aside from "atheism," another is "evolution." Young-Earth creationists, from what I've seen, don't really deny the _process_ of evolution. As long as you call it by a different name (e.g. "adaptation"), and as long as you don't talk about time, you can describe the process and they'll agree with nearly every bit of it. It's the _definition_ of the word they can't accept. For some reason they seem to have a deep-seated need for the theory of evolution to be false, so much so that they need to re-define it to mean that one "kind" of life produces another, even though there is not a single credentialed biologist who would agree with that definition or who would claim such a thing is possible. This call seemed to be practically the same argument but over a different term. To the fundamentalists, if you need your own definitions of words in order to "win" an argument, you've already lost.
The caller basically made a claim that if you don’t see it as white, then you are telling me it is black. Similar to the courtroom example where if the verdict is not guilty then you believe the defendant is innocent. Just a bad argument from a person who displayed no self awareness.
He really thought he was gonna come into the room, turn on the rizz and charm you both into religiosity... I'll bet he's real slick charmer when it suits him
I tried searching "Jesus shaped lettuce", to prove him wrong, but all I got was a fruit shaped after Buddha's Hand. So I guess he's maybe right, maybe just fruits believe in at least some gods? Toast definitely believes in Jesus, we have overwhelming evidence for that!
@@JimCastleberry Yes, you did. You say we MUST believe in God because to do otherwise means that one lacks cognition of any kind. The stupidest argument ever!
@@JimCastleberry Look, Jimmy is triggered😂 He now has to resort to laughable threats, poor Jimmy! Have you tried praying us away? It worked so well on the gay, didn't it?🤣
@@vertigo4236 Yes, he can't defend his 'argument' because it isn't an actual argument, just a sorry attempt at an insult. As if a reasonable person can't tell the difference between not being convinced by a claim and having no capacity to consider said claim in the first place. Unless Jimedith actually recognizes no such difference! Maybe. I have never had csuse to mistake Jimedith for a reasonable person!
Does Mad Jimedith Castleberry really not recognize any distinction between being unconvinced of a claim and being unable to consider said claim at all, or is he merely pretending to be that stupid? Thoughts?
Theist: I can prove god exists. Atheist: prove it. Theist: well here's the thing about the colour blue (meaning something not related at all) Atheist: cool. So what was that proof again?
The opposite of like is dislike. If I say that I don't like you then I might dislike you, but I might just not know you well enough to say that I like you or dislike you. Atheism is a statement that "I don't believe" any theistic claims. If I say that I'm an atheist then I might believe that there are no gods, but I might also simply not believe that there are gods.
This is why I prefer to say that I'm an agnostic atheist because it highlights the lack of assertion on my part. Although I know that the version of the Christian god which I believed in doesn't exist, there are many god claims which are unfalsifiable so I can't know if they aren't true. However, I would still need evidence and a convincing argument to justify belief in such a god.
"To the question of whether I believe in God, if we were in court I'd object on the ground that the question assumes a fact not in evidence." -Vincent Bugliosi-
The usual debunked arguments: Fine tuning - no constants or parameters have been demonstrated to be tuned or confirmed as independent of each other. Anthropic principle / puddle reasoning (distinct from FTA) - relies on assuming that things are noticeably existent because they were intended to be rather than because they exist and were noticed. KCA - relies on special pleading a particular something from nothing. Contingency - relies on special pleading that contingency exists. Design - relies on comparing known human design with known lack of design then assuming everything unknown is designed. Irreducible Complexity - still not demonstrated to exist. Objective Moral Values - still not demonstrated ontologically. NDEs - basically another claim that personal experiences are true by default. DNA as information - usually hampered by misrepresentation of the definition of information, often with the false claim of being totally digital. Existence of Consciousness/Intelligence - often falsely claimed to require themselves already existing in order to exist. Usually presented as a false dichotomy ignoring that both vary throughout an organism's existence. Free Will - usually involves equivocation on what free will means and false dichotomies on determinism and randomness, sometimes with a composition fallacy. Scripture Prophecy - usually a mix of statements not verifiable as prophecy, appeal to probability, and appeal to authority.
Yet, you got the argument for Fine Tuning completely incorrect again. Fine Tuning- an appeal to an observation selection effect, that the range of possible observations that could be made about the universe is limited by the fact that observations could happen only in a universe capable of developing intelligent life, The Anthropic Principle.
The FINE-TUNING argument destroys atheism when you investigate it’s depth. Not only is there 100+ entities created/designed by God to sustain life, but he had to fine tune them all to support life or life would not survive: What if wind was a constant 300 mph? What if you had no feet or they hurt so bad that you couldn’t walk? What if you had no emotions or your only emotion was extreme hatred? What if there was no food or plenty of food, but you had no mouth or anus? What if gravity was so strong that you couldn’t move? What if there was no sun or the sun was too close or too far away? What if radiation on earth stayed at a deadly dose? What if the entire earth was a ph of 1+ (stomach acid)? What if there was no sound or sound was so loud & constant that no life could survive? What if there was no water? What if there was water, but it was impossible to make it potable (drinkable)? What if disease was so strong that no human life could survive? What if predators were so strong & fast that no human could survive? What if there was no rain or it never stopped raining, so that no life could survive? What if there were no plants or plants didn’t exist to provide us oxygen to breathe? What if we didn’t have our 5 senses? We couldn’t survive. What if the 2nd law was too strong and we died quickly? What if there was no food chain? What if there was no gender or no opposite sex? What if there was no attraction for the opposite sex? What if there was no such thing as reproduction? What if we had no legs or they were too short? What if we were too violent, so that we murder each other every day? What if we didn’t have a digestive system or had one that didn’t work? What if it was impossible to stay warm? What if UV light was too strong? What if there was no light ever and we couldn’t never see anything? What if the atmosphere gases were all poisonous & we couldn’t survive? What if the smell of earth was too pungent to allow life? What if our bodily energy was too weak for us to survive? What if there was no reason to live? No quality of life possible? What if we had no bodily systems or they wouldn’t function? What if it was impossible for us to communicate w/ other humans? I'm sure I could add a lot more to prove fine-tuning by God. WHAT IF THERE WAS NO FOOD CHAIN? Scientists will tell you that if you remove the FOOD CHAIN, all of life falls apart. So who could have not only thought up such a design, but also created it? What Power & intelligence exists that is so OBVIOUSLY superior to mankind, that could produce such a thing as the FOOD CHAIN? We call him "God" and God takes credit for his creation in GENESIS. I just named probably 40+ entities that are not only created/designed by God, but FINE-TUNED also. And I could name a 100 if I wanted. So 100 entities and then all 100 being fine-tuned = the degree of difficulty of hitting a 100 number lottery, which is impossible. Today, lotteries don’t go over 7 numbers, because an 8 number lottery is approaching the IMPOSSIBLE. So a 100 numbered lottery is IMPOSSIBLE no matter how many times you try and lottery numbers are only from 1 thru 70, but as for chance, there’s virtually no limit to the numbered odds; thus, you have no chance for chance. This is proof that only God could have created/designed the many entities we see today and then fine-tuned them for life. Atheism debunked. STOP with the stupidity already. Atheism is a religion. A religion of “SELF.” Instead of properly worshipping God and putting him first in your life; YOU PUT YOURSELF FIRST. EVERYBODY HAS A FAITH. It’s just that your faith is stupid. Atheism tenets (e.g. big bang, abiogenesis, mistakes (mutations) gaining in complexity/new information, star formation, evolution) I debunk w/ ease. 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 LOL
"I have no pie." "No pie is still a pie. I just means you have none. Have means you retain a pie. It's just that the pie you have is not there. I have a pie, but you BELIEVE you don't just because you have no pie." "Where is your pie? I don't see yours, either. Show it to me." "I have a pie. Just accept I have a pie the same as I believe I know you don't believe you don't have a pie."
Its absurd when someone says hay let me tell you what you believe & when you acknowledge that isn't what you believe they keep talking about it anyways .. isnt this a strawman btw ?
Why can't religious people ever back up their claims? Why can they only state, "You can't explain this or that," therefore the God I was indoctrinated into? Support your claim!
And Libby just rage deleted 2 of her threads. I predicted that she would. You could tell that she was starting to fray from having her feet held to the fire by Sundae's repeated question about teen grape victims having access to abor*ion.
I feel your frustration. I'm agnostic and I get the same nonsense ramblings as you good people do: " Does that mean you don't know God,Jesus, the Bible, etc.?" Short answer, it means I don't know IF God/Jesus even exist or not. I DON'T KNOW! No one's been able to "prove" one way or the other. Christians stare at me like a baboon trying to figure out e=mc2! "I don't know" isn't all that complicated. "But the Bible says.." Yeah, and The Hobbit says a lot about Bilbo Baggins and Gandalf. Ugh! Nuff said. Great work. I really enjoy watching and listening, especially when Christians make complete fools of themselves!
This was one of the clearest evidence that Theists have no argument. If he can't avoid backing up his belief, he's got nothing to say. No matter how hard they tried to get him to back up his claim, all he is prepared to do is deflect to anything else
No way, atheism gets you into lifestyles that makes you mentally ill and want to commit suicide. Nobody has more rituals at least that I've seen in the atheist human is at least crazy rituals. For example 75% of people who identify as Jewish identify as atheist. They practice this ritual called metzitzah jobs. This is where after circumcision the mostly atheist humanist parents give their son to a man herpes. And let's not forget about the gender rituals. I'd much rather take my children to church on Sunday than drag queen story hour
@@ChildsRightToLife Yes way! kidding you not brother, atheism gets you out of those boring AF God ritual activities like worship and prayer. Pretty sure it's Muslims that have the most ritual activities, like having to do worship and prayer 5 times a day, compared to the other top religions. And lets not forget the funny hats and dress code required for these ritual activities. I'd much rather take my children to visit their grandparents on a Sunday, than sit in a church building listening to an old man mumble humdrum God stuff. Each to their own interests and hobbies I always say. God bless & Thank Gods will for Jewish atheist drag queens🙏🏳🌈✝🏳🌈🙏 Peace Love Empathy From Australia 💪🤠🤘 🦵🦶
"Well I can justify Christianity"
"Go for it"
"Okay, so atheists--"
Every time man. That's why I stopped believing. They got nothing. It's all one big confidence game (and, perhaps, some sort of weird Daddy fixation? anyway)
Atheism is rebellion against God. That atheism becomes pathological when the atheist continues to lie to themselves over and over against about true reality. Like it or not, a rock didn't come from a bang, get wet & produce the human being over time. NOTHING like that or similar to that is POSSIBLE. But this is the type of garbage the atheist lies to themselves about until they start to believe that the IMPOSSIBLE is POSSIBLE.
NOTHING of the atheist cult can be SCIENTIFICALLY DEMONSTRATED/OBSERVED IN REAL TIME (e.g. big bang, abiogenesis, mistakes (mutations) gaining in complexity/new information, new anatomy differing from ancestry/evolution) as TRUE NATURE is SCIENTIFICALLY DEMONSTRATED/OBSERVED IN REAL TIME (e.g. flower bloom, reproduction, photosynthesis, digestion, respiration, top down production, gravity, sunshine). The atheist cult is nuked by just this one paragraph.
@@quotedotes "THEY GOT NOTHING!" Screams the lost and clueless atheist that thinks star dust, moist rocks and mud puddles have the INTELLIGENCE, POWER, PURPOSE, RESOURCES AND MEANS to create/design LIFE, INTELLIGENCE, LOVE, CONSCIOUSNESS, MORALITY, the human being and ALL the co-existent bodily systems (circulatory, respiratory, reproductive, pulmonic, digestive, skeletal, muscular, nervous, body (skin), etc., etc.) intertwined in co-dependent order in the human body :) Atheism is pure idiocy.
@@quotedotesI would say the weird daddy fixation comes from the atheistic humanist. A man who is a homosexual is way more likely to identify as an atheist humanist.
Atheism is a disbelief which means it's an unwillingness or inability to accept God it's logically repulsive.
And humanism is complete garbage
I can justify santa claus. Go ahead. So… asantaists…
Dude calls a show. Dude gets nearly everything he says or asserts wrong. Dude is a typical theist caller.
"If reality, without your help, does not convince a person of the self-evident, he has abdicated reason and cannot be dealt with any further".
-Leonard Peikoff- Objectivist
The only thing worse than having an imaginary friend is having an imaginary enemy.
Brojo chose poorly.
There's something worse than both of those things. And that's having an imaginary brain that doesn't fit your body which makes you who ever you think you are your own worst enemy.
Atheist humanist have the craziest believes that lead to so much devastation. Not Only to themselves but their children
Or an imaginary soup. Atheism is rebellion against God. That atheism becomes pathological when the atheist continues to lie to themselves over and over against about true reality. Like it or not, a rock didn't come from a bang, get wet & produce the human being over time. NOTHING like that or similar to that is POSSIBLE. But this is the type of garbage the atheist lies to themselves about until they start to believe that the IMPOSSIBLE is POSSIBLE.
NOTHING of the atheist cult can be SCIENTIFICALLY DEMONSTRATED/OBSERVED IN REAL TIME (e.g. big bang, abiogenesis, mistakes (mutations) gaining in complexity/new information, new anatomy differing from ancestry/evolution) as TRUE NATURE is SCIENTIFICALLY DEMONSTRATED/OBSERVED IN REAL TIME (e.g. flower bloom, reproduction, photosynthesis, digestion, respiration, top down production, gravity, sunshine). The atheist cult is nuked by just this one paragraph.
I disagree. It is bad to have an imaginary friend. It is worse to donate to his imaginary friend's fan club.
@@jamesparson "IMAGINARY!" Screams the lost and clueless atheist that thinks star dust, moist rocks and mud puddles have the INTELLIGENCE, POWER, PURPOSE, RESOURCES AND MEANS to create/design LIFE, INTELLIGENCE, LOVE, CONSCIOUSNESS, MORALITY, the human being and ALL the co-existent bodily systems (circulatory, respiratory, reproductive, pulmonic, digestive, skeletal, muscular, nervous, body (skin), etc., etc.) intertwined in co-dependent order in the human body :) Atheism is pure idiocy.
@@Snuggles_the_Unholy Very funny. I’m gonna use that!
I miss these two.
Yes! I believe they both are way better than the current hosts
Yeh, the whole drama a few years back really hurt TAE. Its never been the same. TAE went corporate and a little too focussed on merch and some kind of hypersensitivity about... things :(
I miss them as well
Forrest and Jmike are great. I'd even throw Armin and Jim in there as being good. The rest are forgettable. @@scottjohnson7248
Belief is just the state of being convinced. Theists are convinced that God exists. I’m not. Period. That’s Atheism. The hardest part of Atheism is convincing people that it isn’t anything more than that.
Belief is feel-facts.
It's never atheism versus theism, it's rationality versus irrationality.
or intellectual honesty, it ok to admit when we don't know although there are believing scientists who don't follow this rule.
You can be an atheist and be irrational. There are atheists who believe in astrology.
@@jamesparsonAnd? The op never said that atheists couldn't be irrational.
@@scottjohnson7248 I would correct my comment... but it is gone.
Same thing.
Hats off to them for their patience with callers like this. For me, listening to these calls is like enduring a root canal. When they can't defend their beliefs, they pivot to complaining about Atheism. It's like watching someone try to juggle with one hand-painful and pointless.
A root canal is better because at least the use anesthetics.
Fr 😂 I am amazed at the level of patience. I would lose my mind on my very first day! It's like they get the same call over & over & over. They handle them though, and that's amazing to me.
There are people that can juggle with 1 hand
To me, a root canal is far more bearable because it doesn’t make my brain hurt like these callers do.
@@DulceN
Atheism is the only position I know of that doesn't require a brain. If you replace the brain of an agnostic with a rock you do the same thing with somebody who believes in God and an atheist what you would end up with is 3 atheist because they wouldn't have the willingness or ability to accept God..
11:32 His condescending tone here is just nauseating, especially since his arguments are all invalid straw men.
People like him have a religion which convinces them that they have all the mysteries of the universe figured out, and anyone who doesn't buy into their baseless garbage is just a stupid poo poo dumb dumb head
Especially his line about them rejecting the Christian god and not serving them how they were made to do. That was just dripping with arrogant condescension.
Teaching children religion should be classified as child abuse. I would prefer that children be taught that slavery, racism, genocide, sexism, incest and homophobia are all immoral and illegal. When these children are adults then they can be exposed to the immorality contained within the bible.
Child Abuse is defined as, "physical maltreatment or sexual molestation of a child," by the Oxford Dictionary.
By definition, JUST, reaching religion inherently doesn't do this.
@@Dutch_Vander_Linde_ Yeah. That's why I wrote that it should be. Thanks for the definition.
@@asdusty4372 Why do you want to redefine words?
@@Dutch_Vander_Linde_ Words get redefined all the time. English is a living language.
@@asdusty4372 Yes, but they only get redefined by popular culture, not by someone who wants to call a belief system, "child abuse."
According to theists, atheism is idolatry and a religion. Because not worshipping anything is clearly a form of worship and not having faith in any gods is a religion, of course.
Happy firsties! 🥳
And not collecting stamps is a hobby.
Fun fact: Under the first amendment, atheism is a protected (lack of) belief.
Atheism is a religious cult; rebellion against God. That atheism becomes pathological when the atheist continues to lie to themselves over and over against about true reality. Like it or not, a rock didn't come from a bang, get wet & produce the human being over time. NOTHING like that or similar to that is POSSIBLE. But this is the type of garbage the atheist lies to themselves about until they start to believe that the IMPOSSIBLE is POSSIBLE.
NOTHING of the atheist cult can be SCIENTIFICALLY DEMONSTRATED/OBSERVED IN REAL TIME (e.g. big bang, abiogenesis, mistakes (mutations) gaining in complexity/new information, new anatomy differing from ancestry/evolution) as TRUE NATURE is SCIENTIFICALLY DEMONSTRATED/OBSERVED IN REAL TIME (e.g. flower bloom, reproduction, photosynthesis, digestion, respiration, top down production, gravity, sunshine). The atheist cult is nuked by just this one paragraph.
It also helps to put atheists into the ‘bad guy’ pigeonhole so he makes up stories about them that makes them fit better.
I just called to tell you what you believe. 😂
Great one 👍
Thanks dude, I wasn’t sure 😂
It would be such a better show if the show with higher hosts that actually believed the origins of Life came into existence without God this way there could be a decent debate
But since atheism is a disbelief it's an unwillingness or inability to accept God and these hosts don't actually believe the origins of Life came into existence without God. It makes for a terrible debate. They want you to convince them that God exists meanwhile they don't have the willingness or ability to accept it and at the same time they don't actually believe the origins of Life came into existence without God.
On top of that they don't even want to admit that atheism is a disbelief it's an unwillingness or inability to accept god. But at the same time they want to say atheism is whatever we say it is they also want the default position lol.
You can't have it both ways you can't say atheism is whatever you say it is and you always have the default position.
Atheism is the default position specifically because it's an unwillingness or inability to accept God its position as nothing to do with evidence it's a bias.
Some atheists will claim that atheism is a belief that God doesn't exist. And again they'll claim but I still have the default position I have no burden of proof lol.
@@ChildsRightToLife why would anyone waste time “believing” that?
We have no need for that hypothesis. Go and get some evidence for your beliefs and present them - _that_ would make a better show…
@@bestbehave *why would anybody waste time believing ,that*
Are you talking about the atheist humanist beliefs about their children being born in the wrong body. Or about their beliefs that their ancestors were sea creatures or their beliefs that life can just pop into existence because of a non intelligent occurrence. You're going to have to be more specific.
I think the worst of their beliefs is the idea that children are born with a brain in their body that doesn't match their body because they end up cross-dressing and mutilating their children because of that belief .
The question is why would anybody have a disbelief AKA an unwillingness or inability to accept something as true regardless of evidence.
Sorry but atheism is intellectually repulsive and humanism is morally repulsive.
Arrogance in ignorance.
"I don't have a problem with ignorance. We are all ignorant about a variety of subjects we are not currently aware of. The real problem is when that ignorance is wilful, intentional and used as a weapon against anyone who disagrees with you, or anyone who has the nerve to present facts you don't want to accept."
- anyone who actually cares about verifiable reality
"The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt.”
- Bertrand Russell
@@IRGeamerI love that Bertrand Russel quote!
The part that peeved me was his arrogance in saying "Because you reject the Christian god and don't want to serve him how you were made to do..."
We call that religion
It never ceases to amaze me how theists don't understand what atheism is, when it simply means I don't accept your claims that a god exists, how hard is that to understand.
We know what stupidity (atheism) is. Atheism is rebellion against God. That atheism becomes pathological when the atheist continues to lie to themselves over and over against about true reality. Like it or not, a rock didn't come from a bang, get wet & produce the human being over time. NOTHING like that or similar to that is POSSIBLE. But this is the type of garbage the atheist lies to themselves about until they start to believe that the IMPOSSIBLE is POSSIBLE.
NOTHING of the atheist cult can be SCIENTIFICALLY DEMONSTRATED/OBSERVED IN REAL TIME (e.g. big bang, abiogenesis, mistakes (mutations) gaining in complexity/new information, new anatomy differing from ancestry/evolution) as TRUE NATURE is SCIENTIFICALLY DEMONSTRATED/OBSERVED IN REAL TIME (e.g. flower bloom, reproduction, photosynthesis, digestion, respiration, top down production, gravity, sunshine). The atheist cult is nuked by just this one paragraph.
@@brantsonoverton1367 Ok obviously you are mentally ill, but even you should understand that nothing you said has anything to do with atheism.
Let me help you:
Theist: I believe that there is a god who made his own virgin mother pregnant with himself to sacrifice himself to himself because a woman made out of ribs was told by a snake to eat a magical fruit.
Atheist: Ok?! Do you have any evidence for that claim?
Theist: No
Atheist: Yeah sorry I am not able to believe that.
And that´s all there is to it.
@@brantsonoverton1367
We know what stupidity (theism) is.
Deeply ingrained religious beliefs formed in childhood can create a mental block against considering alternative viewpoints. This can lead to a strong resistance towards atheism, which some misinterpret as the active denial of a god's existence. This misunderstanding fuels anxieties about abandoning their faith and a misplaced burden of proof placed upon themselves to convince atheists, a seemingly impossible task.
@@murali-alive You could very well be right, but I was in the same boat when I was young, my mother was very religious, and I was brought up that way and to believe in a god, but reading the bible saw me starting to question the existence of a god, and I did have to struggle somewhat with my beliefs at the time, and it took a while before I could deny gods existence outright, thankfully now though I'm free of the tyranny of the Christian god.
I was curious about what Stanford said, and it literally starts with: "The word “atheism” is polysemous-it has multiple related meanings. "
And this dude just ignored that part to pick the one definition he wanted to fight...
atheism is a cult religion, amen...
@@BIG_r.
Obvious troll is obvious AF.
Part of being a Bible believing Christian is believing words don't change and can't change meaning.
If he finds a definition he likes, he thinks he has found the Capital T Truth
The SEP also tries to argue atheism in an extremely dishonest way. It tries to force atheism into “accepting no gods exist” which is a separate claim. It also tries to argue that no atheist has fully considered every definition for god which is absurd and tries to put the burden on atheists to prove what god actually is to be able to hold the belief gods don’t exist which is also absurd.
My web search could not find a "Stanford Dictionary of Philosophy". I did find a Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. I looked up atheism, and this is the first few sentences of the entry I found:
The word “atheism” is polysemous-it has multiple related meanings. In the psychological sense of the word, atheism is a psychological state, specifically the state of being an atheist, where an atheist is defined as someone who is not a theist and a theist is defined as someone who believes that God exists (or that there are gods). This generates the following definition: atheism is the psychological state of lacking the belief that God exists.
The entry continues to talk about alternate definitions, including the proposition that there are no gods. So the caller is either forgetful or disingenuous to claim that the reference contradicts AXP's definition of atheism. The caller should have acknowledged that there are multiple definitions of atheism, and then accepted that the hosts were using a certain definition rather than denying that their definition is listed in his reference.
Yeah the wording at the conclusion of this is popular (even among many atheists), but I stopped using this "lack of belief in" or "lacking belief in" years ago because the word 'lack' is generally interpreted to signify something is missing that ought to be present… that something is 'wrong' or amiss. I replaced it with "absent a belief in" or "absence of belief in" because it feels more accurate to me.
DK is going to love chatting with you 😂
This part was subject to a subtle change in 2022, when the contributor included the fancy word _polysemous_ as philosophers must use kant to exclude mere middling minds from _The Amalgamated Union of philosophers, Sages, Luminaries and Other Professional Thinking Persons_ .
However, the article goes on to say "In philosophy, however, and more specifically in the philosophy of religion, the term “atheism” is standardly used to refer to the proposition that God does not exist".
To claim a negative of an unfalsifiable claim is irrational, so philosophers of religion must be irrational; but we already knew that.
As we atheists far outnumber philosophers it is _our_ usage that prevails, so philosophers should p155 off and get back to their armchairs..
@@nealjroberts4050 What are you talking about?
“But the funny thing is you believe-“
“No I don’t”
“Right sure, but the funny thing is you believe-“
“No I don’t”
The negative of "guilty" is "not guilty", which is different from "innocent".
The negative of "I believe a god exists" is "I don't believe a god exists", which is different from "I believe no god exists".
It's really not that complicated.
10 out of 10 forum trolls are going to disagree on that last part.
It is *super* hard for them!
😅
The distinction between negatives and opposites is often lost on some.
@@nealjroberts4050
I agree. But there's some cause for this confusion, since people sometimes (wrongly) reason by analogy with algebraic negation.
It's a good reminder that reasoning by analogy is always a tricky business.
OP, if you've ever met an American theist, yeah, is really complicated for them.
Their indoctrination has leached all critical thinking from them.
The guilty versus not guilty is the best example! Not guilty is not the same as innocent.
Let me preach.I don't want to prove nothing Blah blah
I know where you're going with this you're talking about the atheist humanist compelling speech when it comes to gender.
And that's the argument you're trying to make just come out and say it. say
Don't react. He's a troll who seems to create a new account for every video to troll with rage baits.
@TheLevantin He uses the nick ChildsRightToLife because he is a child.
@@TheLevantin just because you become emotionally triggered by somebody else's words it doesn't mean they're trolling you.
If you don't like new accounts talk to your fellow high estrogen male atheist and tell them to stop crying to TH-cam every time they get triggered by another man's words.
I'm guessing that you're a member of the tribe and you don't like me to talk about metzitzah jobs and the Talmud.
I know let's see, will you denounce metzitzah jobs , your refusing to do so tells me all I need to know about you
@@lidbass we both know if I was a child you and the rest of the atheist humanists adults would be trying to hook up with me..
Right now you would be trying to entice me to meet up at some kind of drag queen story hour event at the library
Every time you hear a Theist say, “What Atheists say” or “What Atheists believe,” you know there’s plenty of Straw mans coming.
@@johnsperry9494
I'm a theist myself and it annoys me. However it is a good indicator that someone doesn't argue in good faith and will likely be dishonest on other things.
Unless the next words are “is they are not convinced a god exists”
@@nealjroberts4050 If I were to believe in God for bad reasons wouldn't I still be closer to being saved?
Yes.. and a big dose of dishonesty.
Yea, because I always wonder what's this atheist doctrine we're supposed to follow? How are us atheists even supposed to know what we're supposed to believe as atheists since we all pretty much are supposed to believe the same things? A lot of theists do this and with other things like the burden of proof, because we do it to them on occasions but they don't recognize the blatant differences. Theists, especially Christians, have a book and traditions supposedly given to them by their god which tells them what they're supposed to believe and do, we don't.
I miss these two so much. They are the best. I wish they would start their own show.
If you look to the Lord of the Rings, that is physical evidence for the existence of Gandalf. It's Gandalf's revealed word. Christian reasoning. I am SO sick of them.
This is good, but go with Bilbo or Frodo because in-universe, they are the authors of the lord of the rings, so it's very much their word
@@lazloholt262 But then Frodo or Bilbo would be like Paul, and telling the story of Gandalf and his resurrection.
We should all thank all of the theist trolls for commenting and helping the ACA with the TH-cam algorithm. They are convincing nobody with their BS while driving ACA engagement. Thanks, guys!
A very true statement!
My Zeus, this guy is the all time Strawman builder.
The guy doing mental gymnastics that can qualify for the next Olympic 🤣
Classic “I’m right because you’re wrong”.
He had a script. You got him off script.
Most definitely
textbook call in.
one of my favourite things is to watch the face of a theist when you tell them / correct them that an a-theist could technically be a deist.
it's like when you put the wrong punch card in one of those old computers
Consider what someone is saying when they call not believing in God a 'vicious attack on God'.
If you can't see the blinding effects of your own religion, then the religion is working on you. All Brojo has is , "But the bible says..." or "Atheists believe that..."
While not understanding what an atheist is.
Have You seen an avatar episode where TWO tribes are talking though a cannyon. And both were warning bot to bring food, but because they don't like each other both brang food because they belived the other tribe would do it anyways???
This is brojo usual plan. Project everything on his religon onto others.
STOP with the stupidity already. Atheism is a religion. A religion of “SELF.” Instead of properly worshipping God and putting him first in your life; YOU PUT YOURSELF FIRST. EVERYBODY HAS A FAITH. It’s just that your faith is stupid.
Atheism tenets (e.g. big bang, abiogenesis, mistakes (mutations) gaining in complexity/new information, star formation, evolution) I debunk w/ ease. 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 LOL
The God of the Bible is the one true God and Jesus is the only one God the Father has ever raised from the dead.
When you reverse finite nature (time/space/matter) all the way back to non-existence, you have “NOTHING” in regards to finite nature (time/space/matter). The “infinite density” of the big bang can’t exist, BECAUSE INFINITE CAN’T EXIST IN THE FINITE. And since the needy finite exists and can’t self-create, it had to be created IN IT’S BEGINNING by a non-created “non-needy” infinite G0D/prime mover/uncaused first cause.
The universe is not eternal, so there MUST be something outside that is. Being that time/space/matter was created, their cause has to be outside time/space/matter and thus the creator is timeless, spaceless and immaterial. We know G0D is a person, because he created persons, an impersonal force can’t make a choice. Only a person can make a choice, and choices by G0D were made.
Now we need to discuss the actual RATIONAL POSSIBLE cause for creation: The God of the Bible is the one true God and Jesus is the only one God the Father has ever raised from the dead. There can only be one infinite being:
1. An infinite being lacks nothing.
2. For 2 beings to differ, one has to lack something the other has.
3. A being that lacks something, is not infinite.
4. Therefore, there can only be one infinite being.
5. An ultimate being has no potential, because the potential is maxed out. Therefore, it’s a contradiction to say there can or should be more than one infinite being. That would erroneously state that a finite being is not maxed out potential and another one is needed to reach full potential.
6. To say this infinite being is the Christian G0D, we go into the historical evidence of Jesus and his Word. It is patently obvious there can only be one supernatural first cause/prime mover/God.
Atheism is rebellion against God. That atheism becomes pathological when the atheist continues to lie to themselves over and over against about true reality. Like it or not, a rock didn't come from a bang, get wet & produce the human being over time. NOTHING like that or similar to that is POSSIBLE. But this is the type of garbage the atheist lies to themselves about until they start to believe that the IMPOSSIBLE is POSSIBLE.
NOTHING of the atheist cult can be SCIENTIFICALLY DEMONSTRATED/OBSERVED IN REAL TIME (e.g. big bang, abiogenesis, mistakes (mutations) gaining in complexity/new information, new anatomy differing from ancestry/evolution) as TRUE NATURE is SCIENTIFICALLY DEMONSTRATED/OBSERVED IN REAL TIME (e.g. flower bloom, reproduction, photosynthesis, digestion, respiration, top down production, gravity, sunshine). The atheist cult is nuked by just this one paragraph.
@@benjaminmadrigalperez9010 No, it is more like that in brojos head there are only two options. Either he is right or the others are right, so when he can proof that the others are worngtha3t makes him right automatically.
It can't be denied that forcing a mind to go through the contortions of living with one foot in the 21st century and the other in the 1st is damaging.
Short answer: I am not convinced God exists
Long answer:
I don't think there are holy books
I don't think the existence of a God can be established via a book
I don't think people can speak for God
I don't think people can collect money for a God
I don't believe in supernatural things
I don't believe in life after death
I don't believe in magic words
I don't believe in the power of prayer
I don't believe prayer is anything more than silent mumbling
I don't believe my parents had good reason to believe
I don't believe that "In God We Trust" has magic powers
But I do believe the collection plate is real.
Brojo needs to stick to the Discord server. Not quite ready for prime time here.
My understanding is the discord server is a Christian circle jerk.
Wow. Ive been watching this channel for almost 18 years? where does the time go? Love tjhe show ladies. Thank you.
That dude just made a lot of stuff up about the dictionary description of an Atheist, since he was quite wrong.
Just a reminder: we don't owe your pet notions special treatment/ exemption from the rules just because they're yours.
Atheism just means the absence of theism.
"I have no pie."
"No pie is still a pie. I just means you have none. Have means you retain a pie. It's just that the pie you have is not there. I have a pie, but you BELIEVE you don't just because you have no pie."
"Where is your pie? I don't see yours, either. Show it to me."
"I have a pie. Just accept I have a pie the same as I believe I know you don't believe you don't have a pie."
He's lying about the Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy - I've just checked. It doesn't provide its own definition of atheism - it examines various different definitions from different sources.
Every troll here that uses it lies about what it says, not realizing we have Google too.
I haven't seen the post you are talking about yet, but I'm betting that it's cLied that you are talking about - it's one of his copypasta lies.
@@BlarglemanTheSkeptic2 Not a post - Bro Jo from Wa says it at 2:35 in the video.
Just once I’d like to hear a caller support their own claims, rather than tear apart someone else’s claims. No one particular religion is the default option compared to atheism. Creationism isn’t the default position compared with evolution. Support your claims!
Creationists already know that they can't support their claims. That's _why_ they attack alternative positions.
apparently, his conclusion another god made his god and another one made that one and on and on, so infinity which is asinine.
Theist please remember the following;
Preaching at people is the same as Sex, they both need the other persons consent.😇
Please correct me, it was my understanding that the caller Brojo was an apostle of Darth Dawkins.
Not sure, but if he is he hasn't learned to string together a lot of words that sound intelligent and profound but are anything but (like Dawkins and his minions are famous for).
@@solly119119 I just cheeked and this video was very early in his pre-sup journey.
That's my understanding as well.
Thank you, thank you for this channel. Atheist from before I was six, I remember it clearly. It was awesome.
He strikes me as being someone who has been told what atheism is by other theists and has never bothered to ask atheists what they believe. His entire argument seems to be built on this complete misunderstanding of atheism, which is why he is floundering.
I don't claim there are no gods. It would be foolish to claim to falsify an unfalsifiable position. However, I would bet every cent I own that a god will never be demonstrated over a reasonable finite time, and I'm not a gambler. I would do the same for leprechauns and the tooth fairy.
If you want to know how confident a person is in their assertion, ask them to put money on it. That's when you really find out what they believe.
I like to ask if a loved one all of a sudden took seriously ill, do they call emergency services,,,,, or pray?
superstition - noun
1a: a belief or practice resulting from ignorance, fear of the unknown, trust in magic or chance, or a false conception of causation
b: an irrational abject attitude of mind toward the supernatural, nature, or God resulting from superstition
2: a notion maintained despite evidence to the contrary
Merriam-Webster
How doe Brojo conclude that atheists have a different lifestyle? Apart from the fact that I don't waste time (in my view) on sundry magic rituals, my lifestyle is substantially the same as anyone else's. I'm curious what he thinks is different?
Unless you're a surfer, you probably don't have callouses on your knees like he does.
@@mirandahotspring4019 Funny you should say that. I was a surfer (too old now at 70+). I still didn't have callouses. 🤣
I recommend ignoring the cowardly purple space penguin.
They have nothing to add and don't want a good faith discussion
That's because they have immature ideas and notions.
What a tiresome fellow.
I am an athiest.the only claim I make is that I do not believe there is a god
Strictly speaking, not accepting the assertion that a god exists is not in itself a claim. It is, rather, a rejection of the positive claim that a god does exist. This is an important distinction. Because you're not making a positive claim but merely rejecting one, you assume no burden of proof.
However, if you claimed to know there is no god, you would be taking on a burden of proof. And by so doing, you would be committing an error in logic because "there is no god" is not only a claim to knowledge but one that is unfalsifiable.
You don't believe in a god (that's the atheist part) but you accept that you can't say for certain that no god exists (the agnostic part). This renders you an agnostic atheist, which is the only logical position among the four possible (agnotic atheist, gnostic atheist, agnostic theist, gnostic theist) to take on this issue.
Good on ya, mate!
@@stefanbjarnason251Not true. The claim is "I don't believe". That is a claim about a person's inner state. It's as irrefutable as a theist's claim that they do believe. Atheism, unlike theism, isn't a claim about external reality.
Theism is really two separate claims: "I believe in one or more gods" and "One or more gods exist in reality". That's why they have a burden of proof for the second claim.
@@scottjohnson7248 Interesting take. However, I would argue that you're committing a category error by characterizing "I don't believe" and "I believe in one or more gods" as claims. Whether true or untrue (one could be lying) these are not claims in the sense we're talking about here -- namely, assertions requiring validating evidence. They're simply declarations of fact regarding one's state of mind.
@@stefanbjarnason251 It's still a claim and the very claim the op clearly laid out in the comment. You are the one that is confused.
@@scottjohnson7248 Confused? No. I'm simply drawing attention to your overly broad application of the term "claim" to include statements that don't fall into the category of assertions that require evidence for validation.
You seem to suggest that the original commenter referring to his disbelief in gods as a "claim" somehow lends validity to that characterization. It doesn't.
By your lights, virtually anything anyone might say about their internal state -- I'm hungry, I'm bored, I'm feelin' fine -- can rightly be called a "claim" which, while perhaps acceptable on a conversational, colloquial level, muddies the water when the concept of claims is central to the topic under discussion.
"Hey there *Atheist Community of Austin,* I know you guys are kind of amateurs when it comes to atheist terms and phrases. No worries, I'll clear them up for you-after all, I run a _discord server_ so I'm kind of an expert"
THE
H
E
A U D A C I T Y
U
D
A
C
I
T
Y
"In the Discord, I have WON ALL MY DEBATES against the Atheists"
- BroJo
LOLZ
“I read a discord server” oh yes that must be the authority of everything then🙄🤦♂️
That's what I was thinking 😂
Real academic
Reminder that "Brojo" is Canadian Catholic. "Brojo" is the alias he was using when he was feeling particularly dickish on this show
I knew I recognized Canadian Catholic from somewhere. Isn't he also the darth dawkins bi*ch?
I don’t think it is Canadian Catholic.
@@brianfergus839
Right, different tone of voice, at least as I recall.
"Reminder that "Brojo" is Canadian Catholic."
As a Canadian that has always been disgusted by "Canadian Catholic" this is absolutely false.
Baseless assertions just to prop up a narrative... Not even once...
"If you hate something, don't you do it too.”
- Eddie Vedder "Not for You"
"The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt.”
- Bertrand Russell
It really baffles me that people don't understand what atheism is. It's really not that difficult.
This guy needed the gumball analogy.
He wouldn't understand it anyway.
How is it a problem that the universe came from a singularity but God is a-okay coming from nothing, and never questioned.
So Ricardo has run away again after making a fool of himself. 😂😂😂😂😂😂
Brojo is a Darth Dawkins acolyte. He is just running the dialog tree poorly.
It blows my mind the number of people who think they can prove "X" by disproving "Y". Maybe in a Sherlock Holmes universe where there are a finite number of known possibilities, but it seems pretty clear that our real universe is full of infinite possibilities, likely only a very small percentage of which are known or even perceptible (including possibly one or more "gods"), so assailing other possibilities does nothing to promote your claim that yours is correct. I will forever love Bertrand Russell for this: "What is wanted is not the will to believe, but the will to find out, which is the exact opposite." I'm sad to say that I have never found a devout believe whom I could engage rationally. I'm almost convinced that that part of the mind must be turned off (permanently or selectively) to accept religion wholly.
Also, the better rebuttal to that guy saying, "then atheism (a-theism) is the opposite of the belief in a god", might have been, "no, it's only the lack of it"
How difficult is it to understand that an atheist doesn't believe a god exists? One answer to one question. It's not a series of beliefs. I don't believe in Santa, that doesn't make that a world view.
Wait. So you're an asantaist?
Alrighty then. We santaists now know for a fact that your world view is based on the hatred of statutory holidays, white beards, in-house trees, jolly laughter, fluff-lined jackets and gift-giving.
“It’s going to take a long time for me to tell you what you believe.”
Dude, I don't believe your god exists just like you don't believe that other god exists.
The God of the Bible is the one true God and Jesus is the only one God the Father has ever raised from the dead.
When you reverse finite nature (time/space/matter) all the way back to non-existence, you have “NOTHING” in regards to finite nature (time/space/matter). The “infinite density” of the big bang can’t exist, BECAUSE INFINITE CAN’T EXIST IN THE FINITE. And since the needy finite exists and can’t self-create, it had to be created IN IT’S BEGINNING by a non-created “non-needy” infinite G0D/prime mover/uncaused first cause.
The universe is not eternal, so there MUST be something outside that is. Being that time/space/matter was created, their cause has to be outside time/space/matter and thus the creator is timeless, spaceless and immaterial. We know G0D is a person, because he created persons, an impersonal force can’t make a choice. Only a person can make a choice, and choices by G0D were made.
Now we need to discuss the actual RATIONAL POSSIBLE cause for creation: The God of the Bible is the one true God and Jesus is the only one God the Father has ever raised from the dead. There can only be one infinite being:
1. An infinite being lacks nothing.
2. For 2 beings to differ, one has to lack something the other has.
3. A being that lacks something, is not infinite.
4. Therefore, there can only be one infinite being.
5. An ultimate being has no potential, because the potential is maxed out. Therefore, it’s a contradiction to say there can or should be more than one infinite being. That would erroneously state that a finite being is not maxed out potential and another one is needed to reach full potential.
6. To say this infinite being is the Christian G0D, we go into the historical evidence of Jesus and his Word. It is patently obvious there can only be one supernatural first cause/prime mover/God.
Atheism is rebellion against God. That atheism becomes pathological when the atheist continues to lie to themselves over and over against about true reality. Like it or not, a rock didn't come from a bang, get wet & produce the human being over time. NOTHING like that or similar to that is POSSIBLE. But this is the type of garbage the atheist lies to themselves about until they start to believe that the IMPOSSIBLE is POSSIBLE.
NOTHING of the atheist cult can be SCIENTIFICALLY DEMONSTRATED/OBSERVED IN REAL TIME (e.g. big bang, abiogenesis, mistakes (mutations) gaining in complexity/new information, new anatomy differing from ancestry/evolution) as TRUE NATURE is SCIENTIFICALLY DEMONSTRATED/OBSERVED IN REAL TIME (e.g. flower bloom, reproduction, photosynthesis, digestion, respiration, top down production, gravity, sunshine). The atheist cult is nuked by just this one paragraph.
Your lack of understanding of physics is clearly evident.
Your evidence for a god is clearly lacking.
@@brantsonoverton1367Cool.
Got proof?
@@brantsonoverton1367 that's a lot of nothing but nonsensical claims.
@@brantsonoverton1367 Oops. You've revealed yourself to be a typical theist: One who fails to comprehend the critical distinctions among these three concepts: claims, facts and evidence.
But don't feel bad. In order to sustain those comforting, evidence-free beliefs, you really have no choice.
Now off to the prayer tent with you.
For everyone who doesn't understand what is meant by a strawman argument, This caller demonstrates the argument perfectly.
When it comes to a few key "trigger" words, there seems to be a tendency among religious fundamentalists to adhere to only one, very rigid definition and very often, it's not the definition most commonly-used. Aside from "atheism," another is "evolution." Young-Earth creationists, from what I've seen, don't really deny the _process_ of evolution. As long as you call it by a different name (e.g. "adaptation"), and as long as you don't talk about time, you can describe the process and they'll agree with nearly every bit of it. It's the _definition_ of the word they can't accept. For some reason they seem to have a deep-seated need for the theory of evolution to be false, so much so that they need to re-define it to mean that one "kind" of life produces another, even though there is not a single credentialed biologist who would agree with that definition or who would claim such a thing is possible. This call seemed to be practically the same argument but over a different term.
To the fundamentalists, if you need your own definitions of words in order to "win" an argument, you've already lost.
I would add one trigger word:
*Evidence*
They HATE that one😂
@@vertigo4236 🤣👍🍻
The caller basically made a claim that if you don’t see it as white, then you are telling me it is black. Similar to the courtroom example where if the verdict is not guilty then you believe the defendant is innocent. Just a bad argument from a person who displayed no self awareness.
He really thought he was gonna come into the room, turn on the rizz and charm you both into religiosity... I'll bet he's real slick charmer when it suits him
Used car salesman.
@@RideAcrossTheRiver "BroJoe's Best Used Vehicles, we'll even drive you to the bank!"
(PraiseJesusHallelujah can-i-geta GloryToGod-uh!)
@@Faesharlyn Jesus Chrysler!
@@RideAcrossTheRiver Ammonia!
Oh wait, wrong religion...
@@Faesharlyn THE JUDEAN PEOPLE'S FRONT?!?!
Remember folks, repeatedly asserting something does not make it true by default.
Yes it does. Yes it does. Yes it does.
See?
@@stefanbjarnason251
Thanks for demonstrating my point.
Such a great duo. Every response is gold!
This is an oldie but goodie. That was brojo, a presuppositionalist. A darth darkins discipline. He likes to tell people what they think.
Wow, his sources include a discord server. Real academic
Mad Jim Castleberry is back with his "A lettuce doesn't believe in God, therefore God"- possibly the stupidest argument I have ever heard.
I guess it is more stupid than "because I say so" and "you lie"
I tried searching "Jesus shaped lettuce", to prove him wrong, but all I got was a fruit shaped after Buddha's Hand.
So I guess he's maybe right, maybe just fruits believe in at least some gods?
Toast definitely believes in Jesus, we have overwhelming evidence for that!
@@JimCastleberry Yes, you did. You say we MUST believe in God because to do otherwise means that one lacks cognition of any kind. The stupidest argument ever!
@@JimCastleberry
Look, Jimmy is triggered😂
He now has to resort to laughable threats, poor Jimmy!
Have you tried praying us away? It worked so well on the gay, didn't it?🤣
@@vertigo4236 Yes, he can't defend his 'argument' because it isn't an actual argument, just a sorry attempt at an insult. As if a reasonable person can't tell the difference between not being convinced by a claim and having no capacity to consider said claim in the first place. Unless Jimedith actually recognizes no such difference! Maybe. I have never had csuse to mistake Jimedith for a reasonable person!
One of the best call AXP has had. Miss these hosts
She Crucified him @4:35 and had him stuttering😂
Man, he was quick to say there’s a god out there and then zzzzzzzzzz trying to prove it.
Does Mad Jimedith Castleberry really not recognize any distinction between being unconvinced of a claim and being unable to consider said claim at all, or is he merely pretending to be that stupid? Thoughts?
They don't understand the implicit meaning of belief which requires sapience.
He couldn''t get past his first point and returned to it over and over again lol
It's like watching an NPC getting stuck walking into a wall.
I guess Darths minions is back
This video was early on in his Apostleship of Darth, he hasn't memorized the entire gospel of Darth.
Theist: I can prove god exists.
Atheist: prove it.
Theist: well here's the thing about the colour blue (meaning something not related at all)
Atheist: cool. So what was that proof again?
Only a God could intelligently design blue
@@jamesparson 🤣
This caller is master of “so what you’re really saying is…”
So I don’t know if anyone looked it up, but the Stanford dictionary doesn’t define it the way brojo defined it.
Theists constantly erect strawmen. Don't they count as false idols?
The opposite of like is dislike. If I say that I don't like you then I might dislike you, but I might just not know you well enough to say that I like you or dislike you.
Atheism is a statement that "I don't believe" any theistic claims. If I say that I'm an atheist then I might believe that there are no gods, but I might also simply not believe that there are gods.
This is why I prefer to say that I'm an agnostic atheist because it highlights the lack of assertion on my part.
Although I know that the version of the Christian god which I believed in doesn't exist, there are many god claims which are unfalsifiable so I can't know if they aren't true.
However, I would still need evidence and a convincing argument to justify belief in such a god.
"To the question of whether I believe in God, if we were in court I'd object on the ground that the question assumes a fact not in evidence."
-Vincent Bugliosi-
Another Christian assuming that his worldview is the only one that exists, and unable to grasp how anyone can think differently.
Yep, this call got ‘discord debate lord’ written all over it…
‘Brojo’ is just the cherry on top
The usual debunked arguments:
Fine tuning - no constants or parameters have been demonstrated to be tuned or confirmed as independent of each other.
Anthropic principle / puddle reasoning (distinct from FTA) - relies on assuming that things are noticeably existent because they were intended to be rather than because they exist and were noticed.
KCA - relies on special pleading a particular something from nothing.
Contingency - relies on special pleading that contingency exists.
Design - relies on comparing known human design with known lack of design then assuming everything unknown is designed.
Irreducible Complexity - still not demonstrated to exist.
Objective Moral Values - still not demonstrated ontologically.
NDEs - basically another claim that personal experiences are true by default.
DNA as information - usually hampered by misrepresentation of the definition of information, often with the false claim of being totally digital.
Existence of Consciousness/Intelligence - often falsely claimed to require themselves already existing in order to exist. Usually presented as a false dichotomy ignoring that both vary throughout an organism's existence.
Free Will - usually involves equivocation on what free will means and false dichotomies on determinism and randomness, sometimes with a composition fallacy.
Scripture Prophecy - usually a mix of statements not verifiable as prophecy, appeal to probability, and appeal to authority.
Excellent summation.
Yet, you got the argument for Fine Tuning completely incorrect again. Fine Tuning- an appeal to an observation selection effect, that the range of possible observations that could be made about the universe is limited by the fact that observations could happen only in a universe capable of developing intelligent life, The Anthropic Principle.
Because you strawman Fine Tuning it means you’re psychologically unable to think correctly.
The FINE-TUNING argument destroys atheism when you investigate it’s depth. Not only is there 100+ entities created/designed by God to sustain life, but he had to fine tune them all to support life or life would not survive:
What if wind was a constant 300 mph?
What if you had no feet or they hurt so bad that you couldn’t walk?
What if you had no emotions or your only emotion was extreme hatred?
What if there was no food or plenty of food, but you had no mouth or anus?
What if gravity was so strong that you couldn’t move?
What if there was no sun or the sun was too close or too far away?
What if radiation on earth stayed at a deadly dose?
What if the entire earth was a ph of 1+ (stomach acid)?
What if there was no sound or sound was so loud & constant that no life could survive?
What if there was no water?
What if there was water, but it was impossible to make it potable (drinkable)?
What if disease was so strong that no human life could survive?
What if predators were so strong & fast that no human could survive?
What if there was no rain or it never stopped raining, so that no life could survive?
What if there were no plants or plants didn’t exist to provide us oxygen to breathe?
What if we didn’t have our 5 senses? We couldn’t survive.
What if the 2nd law was too strong and we died quickly?
What if there was no food chain?
What if there was no gender or no opposite sex?
What if there was no attraction for the opposite sex?
What if there was no such thing as reproduction?
What if we had no legs or they were too short?
What if we were too violent, so that we murder each other every day?
What if we didn’t have a digestive system or had one that didn’t work?
What if it was impossible to stay warm?
What if UV light was too strong?
What if there was no light ever and we couldn’t never see anything?
What if the atmosphere gases were all poisonous & we couldn’t survive?
What if the smell of earth was too pungent to allow life?
What if our bodily energy was too weak for us to survive?
What if there was no reason to live? No quality of life possible?
What if we had no bodily systems or they wouldn’t function?
What if it was impossible for us to communicate w/ other humans?
I'm sure I could add a lot more to prove fine-tuning by God.
WHAT IF THERE WAS NO FOOD CHAIN? Scientists will tell you that if you remove the FOOD CHAIN, all of life falls apart. So who could have not only thought up such a design, but also created it? What Power & intelligence exists that is so OBVIOUSLY superior to mankind, that could produce such a thing as the FOOD CHAIN? We call him "God" and God takes credit for his creation in GENESIS.
I just named probably 40+ entities that are not only created/designed by God, but FINE-TUNED also. And I could name a 100 if I wanted. So 100 entities and then all 100 being fine-tuned = the degree of difficulty of hitting a 100 number lottery, which is impossible. Today, lotteries don’t go over 7 numbers, because an 8 number lottery is approaching the IMPOSSIBLE. So a 100 numbered lottery is IMPOSSIBLE no matter how many times you try and lottery numbers are only from 1 thru 70, but as for chance, there’s virtually no limit to the numbered odds; thus, you have no chance for chance. This is proof that only God could have created/designed the many entities we see today and then fine-tuned them for life. Atheism debunked.
STOP with the stupidity already. Atheism is a religion. A religion of “SELF.” Instead of properly worshipping God and putting him first in your life; YOU PUT YOURSELF FIRST. EVERYBODY HAS A FAITH. It’s just that your faith is stupid.
Atheism tenets (e.g. big bang, abiogenesis, mistakes (mutations) gaining in complexity/new information, star formation, evolution) I debunk w/ ease. 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 LOL
Perfect. Don't expect brain-addled theists to understand though.
"I have no pie."
"No pie is still a pie. I just means you have none. Have means you retain a pie. It's just that the pie you have is not there. I have a pie, but you BELIEVE you don't just because you have no pie."
"Where is your pie? I don't see yours, either. Show it to me."
"I have a pie. Just accept I have a pie the same as I believe I know you don't believe you don't have a pie."
I know for a fact that Neverending Fraud is wrong.
It seems to be common for those with poor reasoning skills to tell you what you believe and why, as to attempt to prop up their poor arguments.
Its absurd when someone says hay let me tell you what you believe & when you acknowledge that isn't what you believe they keep talking about it anyways .. isnt this a strawman btw ?
Why can't religious people ever back up their claims? Why can they only state, "You can't explain this or that," therefore the God I was indoctrinated into? Support your claim!
Ricardo Martinez was here with a very important message for atheists.
So important was his message that he deleted it.
Literally seconds after whining at me to prove God isnt real.
And Libby just rage deleted 2 of her threads. I predicted that she would. You could tell that she was starting to fray from having her feet held to the fire by Sundae's repeated question about teen grape victims having access to abor*ion.
I miss their “voices”.
God gave us theists for never ending entertainment; what fools believe.
🤣👍
I feel your frustration. I'm agnostic and I get the same nonsense ramblings as you good people do: " Does that mean you don't know God,Jesus, the Bible, etc.?" Short answer, it means I don't know IF God/Jesus even exist or not. I DON'T KNOW! No one's been able to "prove" one way or the other. Christians stare at me like a baboon trying to figure out e=mc2! "I don't know" isn't all that complicated. "But the Bible says.." Yeah, and The Hobbit says a lot about Bilbo Baggins and Gandalf. Ugh! Nuff said. Great work. I really enjoy watching and listening, especially when Christians make complete fools of themselves!
Brojo is a yoyo with no no mojo and needs to go go to a dojo in Togo.
And suffer the fate of Tojo
This was one of the clearest evidence that Theists have no argument. If he can't avoid backing up his belief, he's got nothing to say. No matter how hard they tried to get him to back up his claim, all he is prepared to do is deflect to anything else
I always wonder how these people communicate in the real world.
I just called to tell you I don't know what an Atheist and Atheism is.
Magnificently handled this guy is just not up to the level here.
Atheism gets you out of boring AF God ritual activities like worship and prayer 😎
Thank God for Atheism 🙏
Peace Love Empathy From Australia 💪🤠☝️
No way, atheism gets you into lifestyles that makes you mentally ill and want to commit suicide.
Nobody has more rituals at least that I've seen in the atheist human is at least crazy rituals. For example 75% of people who identify as Jewish identify as atheist. They practice this ritual called metzitzah jobs.
This is where after circumcision the mostly atheist humanist parents give their son to a man herpes.
And let's not forget about the gender rituals.
I'd much rather take my children to church on Sunday than drag queen story hour
G'day Cobber, I saw on the BOM that Tassie is fecking freezing.
Hope you and yours are all fine.
@@ChildsRightToLife Yes way! kidding you not brother, atheism gets you out of those boring AF God ritual activities like worship and prayer.
Pretty sure it's Muslims that have the most ritual activities, like having to do worship and prayer 5 times a day, compared to the other top religions.
And lets not forget the funny hats and dress code required for these ritual activities.
I'd much rather take my children to visit their grandparents on a Sunday, than sit in a church building listening to an old man mumble humdrum God stuff.
Each to their own interests and hobbies I always say.
God bless & Thank Gods will for Jewish atheist drag queens🙏🏳🌈✝🏳🌈🙏
Peace Love Empathy From Australia 💪🤠🤘
🦵🦶
@@ookekklibarianbornagain6708 It's been fresh, that's for sure!
Went wood hooking a few weeks back, so the woodfire is in full swing!
@@smochygrice465 On the GC it;s gotten to 10c and the street is full of wood smoke.
I'm bloody sure some gits are using green wood🤷♀