And he'll do it by quoting a passage from the Bible and reinterpreting it based on his modern knowledge, then claiming that the fact he can read unintended meaning into ancient poetry means the Bible invented science!
@@TheMagicSkeptic Further more, the writer did not, himself, know of the 500. He was told about them by somebody else. That amounts to hearsay of hearsay, not evidence in any way.
@@henrybest4057 assuming that he got the creed from the person who said it first. It's more likely that this claim is Paul saying that someone told him that someone else told him that yet another person told him that 500 people definitely totally saw Jesus. Which is the bestest evidence there is for anything ever, obviously
If I was a witness to a miracle, I would actually write about it. It is funny that none of those actual "witnesses" wrote a thing about what they saw.... All we have is hearsay upon hearsay, which would never be admissible in court. And Hume and Hitch were pretty sharp fellas.... "ARE YOU KIDDING ME?"....
A beloved archbishop visited the small coastal town where he was born and raised. He asked the local pastor, who new to the area, to take him out on the water in the churches small rowing boat. After a while he asked the pastor to stop rowing, so they could just enjoy the ambience. Sitting in silence, the archbishop all of a sudden, calmly stood up in the boat, stepped out of the boat and took a couple of stepps across the water. The pastor, in awe and wonder of the miracle, decided to follow. Treading water, coughing, the pastor looked up at the smiling archbishop, who said; see, faith is not enough, you also need to know where the submerged boulders are.
In 1971 I went on a day trip to Amsterdam with my parents and brother, and while we were there we visited Madame Toussauds. That same year a Dutch comedian did a hidden camera show at Madame Toussauds, where he posed as a waxwork of his famous character Dorus. We watched it on tv. Years later my mother told someone at a birthday party that we had seen the comedian at Madame Toussauds. She was really convinced it had happened, and both my father, my brother and I had difficulty setting her right. That is how easily people can misremember things they saw.
" Some stupid line from David Hume..." Bless your heart, Michael.There are no stupid lines from David Hume. There are only lines you don't understand or comprehend.
Hume cried out on his death bed, " I am in flames." They said his "desperation was a horrible scene." I wonder if he was experiencing where he was headed.
Ah yes, the first argument is one of my personal favorites, 500 unnamed, undocumented "eye witnesses". You'd think for such an important event catching a few names for posterity's sake might have been a consideration 🤷♂️
We also have claims from Kirsten people who insist they have seen Bigfoot and alien abductions. Why don’t they take those testimonies into consideration more considering how recent they are in comparison?
Most people didnt know how to read or write back then did you think there would be a guy with a notepad writing down peoples names? Use some commo sense
They could debunk every atheist ever born by just producing their magical wizard and not the usual fallacies they claim to be proof but an actual testable confirmable entity. Claiming events were witnessed but providing no one to cross examine is just a bald assertion with a trust me bro. We’re supposed to just accept this from people with reputations of lying dishonesty distortion and fabrication. No thanks bro!
Prove using only the Scientific Method ... Evolution, Abiogenesis, a Big Bank 13.8 billion years ago, Inflation in a fraction of a second, Multiverses ... and how your Almighty Mother Nature made & enforces the Laws of Nature that Science relies on? Good Luck. Universal Functions is the hypothesis for all Machine Analogies used by Christians for over 300 years to explain "Intelligent Design" and it fully explains why every nation believes in "the gods" or spirit/soul and is the definitive proof that space, time, laws of nature, matter & energy are Natural Functions with clear purpose, rules & design (information) that can only come from the Mind ... of a very powerful Unnatural Intelligence. Hmmmmm?
If they could even demonstrate that our concept of a creator deity is actually possible in reality, I would at least consider its probability. They can't even do that. Much less can they demonstrate their particular creator deity.
If there were ever a candidate for resurrection, Hitch would be it. Michael would say "there you see, that proves resurrection is possible." Hitch would retort "Yes, but it also proves that you don't have to be the love child of a supernatural deity and a virgin to come back from death.
Or anyone halfway competent. He and his ilk like to go to people who haven't studied the Bible like others have(and who can blame them? All the begatting makes it boring) and can actually debate with knowledge. I enjoy 'Liking' these types of vids for my online discussions with believers who think god is real. I do find it funny though when I mention other gods they pretty much stumble, say their god is the real one, and then leave.
You people sit on your high horses looking down your nose at religious people. All design on this earth is no mere coincidence. Even AI could attest to intelligent design. Also, people in high places tend to worship the devil and you sit here and tell me God is not real. We pray for you all everyday.
@@shauny2206 The irony & obliviousness are always present when engaging with your apologist likes. First of all, that's an age-old argument from incredulity..it's literally bottom of the barrel when it comes to arguments. You're an amateur, and clearly like most religious nuts - you have no idea what I am referring to. Look it up.. Secondly, you're the one sitting on your high horse, you're the one making supernatural claims and avoiding scrutiny by claiming faith & dogma..as if they mean anything. Ah, the usual "ill pray for you" cop out..how pitiful. Prayers are useless superstitions, you dont have to be told that..but you do, so gullible. Children continue to die from cancer despite your useless prayers. Grow the hell up already..you are embarrassing.
Counting the "witnesses" in the gospels is like counting the goblins in LOTR. You don't have actual people, you have a book that says there were people.
In one of my online arguments with a believer about 12 years ago, I said to her a lot of things, one being that Jesus is a conglomeration of several gods from other cultures. She asked for proof, so I told her the gods that existed centuries before Jesus that did his "miracles". She was stunned. I then said that the god of the NT was different than the god of the OT. She told me to explain, so I did by saying that the OT god was vengeful, wrathful, and murderous. The god from the NT was loving and forgiving. She then said the spiel about how god changed. I replied with, "If god changed, then that means he is not perfect, which means he cannot be god". She left after that. Wonder whatever happened to her. Watching this made me remember that for some reason.
The “more than 500” people ALSO needed to have known Jesus so well BEFORE THE CRUCIFIXION, that they could have identified him on sight.. ..except apparently those arresting Jesus, could NOT, and even the Pharisees _(who all super hated him, but somehow didn’t know what Jesus looked like),_ needed Judas to IDENTIFY Jesus by kissing him.. …And all the years of Paul walking around yapping everywhere, not one of the “more than 500” ever said, “Hey Paul, what a coincidence..”
Let me put it this way, though I cannot promise that Knowles will understand this either: How many attorneys and/or judges do you know are confident with accepting eyewitness testimonies and those testimonies _alone?_ If your answer is something other than "none," then how many of them do so without interviewing any, let alone all, of them directly? Yeah, the "500 eyewitnesses" claim fails pretty damn hard.
At best, Paul reports a rumour of 500 witnesses having existed with no names, no locations, no way to find a single one, reporting them to people who had no ability to go looking in the first place.
As regards dissenting voices, there are dissenting voices right now that immigrants in Springfield, Ohio, are eating pets, and yet there is a large number of people who still believe it. Or that after-term abortions are happening in California. And let’s not forget that the Church has had two thousand years of relative power in which dissenting voices were quietly removed…
Big deal, I can debunk Christopher Hitchens easy.. Hitch : - something profound- Me : “Nuh uh!” See? Easy peasy! ..unless ofc you want something comprehensible..
@@TheMagicSkeptic Apparently, the Koine Greek used could be translated as a reference to 5 other texts rather than referring to 500 people who said they saw stuff. I'm unsure whether that's because it's the same words or just ones very close to the ones used, ie a spelling mistake like others in the old manuscripts. Not the weirdest translation issue I've seen this week, even. There's a bit in OT where Moses didn't realise his face was different after talking to God. The word, "qa-ran" can be translated as "ray/column of light" or "horned". So Michelangelo made a sculpture of Moses with horns because the Vulgate, the official translation into Latin, said Moses' face had horns coming out of it. Modern English translations say Moses' face shone, was brilliant, glowed, etc.
Ah yes the 500 witnesses. There was Dave and Dave's dog then there was Jill accompanied by Jack. Bob was there of course and Steve, erm yes it seems a little hard to remember all the names so 500 sounds about right in a city of 60 - 80k.
At the tender young age of 7 with squared bangs and buck teeth, this B.S. wasn't flying with me. I can't understand how people that learned the tooth fairy and Santa Claus was fiction can't finish the equation.
I've talked to someone who said that they were told that 600 people saw Michael Knowles unhinge his jaw and eat a live baby whole in an airport men's room.
@@ElizabethMcCormick-s2n Not even 2nd hand. Paul says it's part of the _creed_ he heard, meaning it was a narrative put together long enough before getting to Paul that it had _become_ a creed. To be 2nd hand, Paul would have to have spoken to 500 people. Instead, it sounds like he heard from someone (or several) the tale that those people had heard. At best, the people Paul spoke to were only 2 degrees of separation from the 500, that is, 500 people spoke to some person/small group who collected their testimony, they spoke about the collection to others, they turned it into a creed which the people Paul spoke to heard the creed. And finally Paul heard the creed from them. Not what you'd call trustworthy! Witnesses => collectors => creed makers => creed tellers => Paul. Worse than "some guy at the pub said"!
A Christian is simply a person who believes a Jew named Jesus Christ ... is the PROPHESIED Messiah from the Torah ... & PROPHESIED Only begotten Son of God from the Torah. You do not need the New Testament to believe Jesus is the promised Jewish Messiah & Son of God .... from the Jewish Torah. Daniel 9 & Jonah state the Messiah will die ... 40 years ... before the Temple is destroyed and Hosea 6 states the Jews will be cursed for 2 x 1000 years for rejecting God's only Son, but over the last 1000 the Jews will return to God. God told Man from the very beginning he has 7 x 1000 years to procreate, including the God (Son) ruling sinful Man for the last 1000 years. This is why the Sabbath is the 7th day of a 7 day week. The year 6000 of 7000 ... is 2030 ... as Jesus died 14 Nisan 30 AD starting the 2 x 1000 year curse on the Jews from rejecting God's Only Son. The Temple represented God on Earth with Man .. and ... the coming Messiah( God's Only Son). And the Temple sacrifices symbolized the Messiah being the pure passover Lamb to save ... anybody who believes ... from God's just nature. Once the Messiah died ( became the sin sacrifice) there was no more need for the Temple. And the rest is up to every human being ... to freely follow & obey God (Torah) or Man(Ways, ideologies, religions, politics). The Jews are under a 2 x 1000 year curse for rejecting God's Only Son. This ends when Jesus returns and is obviously the promised Messiah from the Torah and God's only Son from the Torah. Only 6 more years to go. But Universal Functions destroys Atheism and all other religions that reject Jesus as the Messiah & Son of God.
@@tetrapharmakos8868 i cant take you seriously with that comment there are notable differences between them but im more leaning on shitty father done silly things with two women. saying its ben on drag is probably the worst thing nyone could have said based on the fact the facial structure while similar does indeed have some noticable differences enough to not be able to pull on in drag form.
Michael Knowles is not equipped to debunk anything, or anyone. He is a mental dwarf compared to a giant like Hitchens. To be honest, Knowles is a mental dwarf compared to almost anyone.
"Three men make a tiger" If we grant him his reasoning on eyewitness accounts of the supernatural, doesn't that make Hinduism, Islam, Buddhism, etc, equally true?
@@srenkongstad2992 because they usually mean: I didn’t think about religion most and stopped going to church for a while, which doesn’t necessarily mean they were actually atheist.
@@srenkongstad2992 It often means they stopped going to church for a while and didn’t think about religion, which isn’t the same as being atheist. And sometimes they just lie in order to pretend they know what it is like to be an atheist, and that being a believer is better.
Imagine if we found random letters from that time saying things like "You won't believe what I saw. Remember that preacher they crucified las week? Well I saw him! He is alive somehow." What about Pontius Pilate writing on a report "There was this random preacher that many Jews wanted him dead for some reason. Well we did crucify him, and now people are saying he rose from the dead." The only independent source we have, is Josephus saying that Christians exist... Like, yeah, we all know Christians existed, no one denies that.
It is not just misaprehension, it could simply be a lie. It does not have to even be "500 people" lying in a conspiracy, just one person lying about 500 people, when no one actually saw anything.
Attorney: “Your Honor, we’re not talking about an individual eyewitness, we’re talking about 500 eye witnesses.” Judge: “I’m not seeing these eyewitnesses listed here in your complaint.” Attorney: “Well… it says right here in our book.” Yeah, no, TheMagicSkeptic, this would never work with experts who understand what it means to provide proper supporting evidence - including credible experts or eyewitnesses.
The funniest part is that Mary and the apostles didnt even recognize jesus after his supposed resurrection. They couldn't have mistaken him for someone who looked like him because he wasn't even someone who looked like him. What a ridiculous mythology 🤦
I didn’t realize you could make a living being stupid. I regret now that I might have been able to make so cash with my natural born talent. Nice play Micheal!
It's like, when they pull out the "500 witnesses" thing, you know you're in for a ride. One akin to driving across the Nevada desert. "Cactus. Cactus. Cactus. Gee, another cactus, haven't seen one of those before." If you're going to convince anyone who knows what they're talking about, the 500 witness thing is never going to cut it.
My grandfather died. My brother and I went to his funeral. My brother was not aware that my grandfather had a twin, as they (twins) were somewhat estranged. So when he saw his twin (identical), he had a bit of a shock. So, imagine if I didn’t explain this to him.
Street magicians perform "miracles" in front of hundreds of people everyday. I doesn't mean they were performing literal magic just because hundreds of people saw the trick.
Dude, it's NOT an "account." That term makes it sound like you're reviewing a historical account. That's not what this is. This is a STORY. Just because it's from the Christian Holy Storybook, that doesn't make it any less of a story. Please don't lend credibility to these far-fetched narratives, by calling them "accounts." Please help keep them in their place by correctly identifying them as "Stories!"
The simple fact that not a single religious person can get any God they believe in to show up and do God magic for everyone to see themselves here and now... not 100 years or 2000 years ago to a bunch of dead people
I mean, that's basically what every Christian argument about the historicity of the Bible is based on. The concept of "circular reasoning" just seems to be entirely beyond their ability to grasp.
@@RawrItsJuul It is ultimately kind of circular, though. A woman is basically anyone who meets a sufficient number of an arbitrary list of biological and/or psychological characteristics for others to identify them as "not a man," with that list (and which and how many points you need to qualify) being distinct to each culture and sub-culture within a society.
@@chameleonx9253 what I'm saying is that they (the people at the daily wire) completely understand what circular reasoning is when it comes to the argument "a woman is someone who identifies as a woman". Regardless of your argument my point still stands. Still I don't agree with your position that woman can only be defined through circular reasoning. What about defining people on basis of these characteristics is circular? It is based on observable facts. Generally people innately understand and recognize the differences between men and women, from Europe to Africa to remote tribes in the far corners of the earth. Even if there are some exceptions, in this context we absolutely understand what is meant by women when people define that according to biological characteristics. It is not some vague nebulous term. I also don't really see the point in arguing the redefining of words that have always had a clear definition. Exceptions exist in genetic mutations, that doesn't negate the rule, but proves it correct. In every case by using scientific means we can exactly determine what went wrong and observe the differences. Same as how they use the argument of the limbless person, and no one argues that normally humans have two legs.
Theists vs Hitchens.. like bringing a kitchen knife to a flamethrower fight. Look... I've a book here.. in it a Balrog revealed himself to Gandalf, Aragorn II, Boromir, Gimli, Frodo, Sam, Pippin, Merry and Legolas. So Saruman is real, Sauron is real, Morgoth is real. Start praying to Varda. (And I don't mean the Kuiper Belt object 174567 Varda)
In the recent Trent Horn vs A Mormon debate there’s an excellent sound bite in the middle where Trent admits the Bible contains no more than 3 eyewitness accounts.
Using their claims to prove their other claims in the same collection, all to justify their hallucination. Religious ppl truly live in the same Realm of God. The deIusionaI Realm.
Peter fell into the water when he looked down when Jesus said he shouldn't while holding his hand, it was not shallow or some 'trick'. Although the biggest miracle would then be the 'big bang', since something came from nothing.
@@Mouth-of-Spaghetti The big bang is a pretty amazing and big trick, someone or something had to be behind, otherwise it is just ridiculous to say it always existed or nothing made it.
Apologists have tried to dismiss Hitch before by conveniently ignoring his second point (here, resurrection was a banality). Hitch's 2-part moral challenge - name a moral act exclusive to theists *_then_* name a wicked act which only theists could perform (pp 'you've already thought of one') - they struggle with the first part & ignore the second.
Both questions are easy. You just need to talk to a Christian who's thought about them for a while. A moral act exclusive to theists - worshipping God simply for who He is. A wicked act which only theists could perform - seeing God act in a situation and then claiming that the act had nothing to do with Him. Unless you can think of an atheist capable of either of these while remaining an atheist, of course.
@@mikehutton3937 I suggest the challenge accepts that people remain in their current state of belief / non-belief as implied by the 2nd part of the challenge which shows the division between theists & atheists.
Peter and Paul should have look for Mary then they could have start a band called Peter Paul and Mary then they can make a song called Puff the Magic Dragon😂😂
"We're not talking you *you* being deceived, we talk about 500 eye witnesses being deceived!" No, were talking about *one* guy who *claims* there were 500 eye witnesses and who might actually try do *deceive* you with that totally unsupported statement. If that is what faith makes you, I'd rather remain atheist, thank you for trying, though.
If that's your view, you need to choose your heroes more carefully. Hitchens himself admitted to being bested on a number of occasions, usually ascribing his failure to not being prepared or a failure to investigate his opponent fully. Hitch was, after all, somewhat lazy and overconfident. Not to mention a rather better rhetorician than a philosopher.
@@mikehutton3937 That"s ridicules, the only way for an unbeliever to be bested is for god to literally show up in person in a peer-reviewed setting for all to see. No book, texts, or human on the planet can prove the supernatural.That’s ridicules, the only way for an unbeliever to be bested is for god to literally show up in person in a peer-reviewed setting for all to see. No book, texts, or human on the planet can prove the supernatural. I've watched Hitchens's debates and he always received the most votes. He wouldn't say the impossible.
@@mikehutton3937 "Bested" here and there in a debate or discussion is one thing, but debunking the central arguments Hitchens made is a different game altogether. Try it. What is heroic about him is that he was one of the more articulate representatives of the atheist viewpoint.
Not rationally, you can not. But then, there is the problem: You cannot reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into in the first place.
@@joshuaf.3723 *"You cannot reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into in the first place."* This is a seductive line, but it's just not true. and shows that even folks who consider themselves pretty reasonable can be seduced by a well-turned phrase. In fact, many people who have held a view for bad reasons can come to realize they'd made a choice before fully comprehending the importance of good reasoning. Once they become aware of the importance of reasoning and the problems with accepting claims based upon how they feel, they can grow to become quite good at doing what they had once ignored. Many former believers can attest to this.
‘Nice’ to come the temporal lobe epilepsy fact. Same here, have experienced things that weren’t real. Sometimes I wonder if I’d have been a saint 2000 years ago. 😂
@@TheMagicSkeptic The poor theist would implode after your joint scolding. We need to raise the societal cost of dishonesty and gullibility and they way you call out the often absurd levels of ignorance or (self)deception is very needed.
1:12 I was VERY confused by the past minute because I didn't realise it was an intro, I thought you simply started your response there with the first clip. (Edit) For reference, I watch with captions on mobile, and their placement almost entirely covers the "Later in the video" banner.
There's an island I visited in Turkey where you can walk in a straight line and the water comes up to your ankles.. But if you step left or right you'd fall into the deep water
To paraphrase Dale Allison, biblical scholar extraordinaire, "if you ask any question about the 500, we don't know the answer". But good ole Michael knows, apparently!
The truth is, Christians do NOT like John 14:12-14 Christians say they believe in Jesus, yet can't do any of the great things Jesus has done. Again, Christians don't have the faith period! Either that or the NT is us just a fairytale story and NOT true. Wonder which it is.
Knowles wouldn't have even been prestigious enough (and that bar was _trivial_ to get under) to debate Hitchens when he was around, yet he thinks he can debunk him? If I didn't know Knowles was being serious, I would think he was a comedian playing the long con for comedy.
The most hilarious thing about the whole daily wire cast is how arrogant they are. Sure, they look witty and wise, arguing with 18yo college kids but put them against an actual intellectual, and they simply dont stack up.
When I see people today arguing about crowd sizes in political rallies while there are actual recordings of the events, I really wonder why we should trust some shady texts written by unidentified authors about the son of god walking on water or healing blind people by spitting in their faces 20 or 30 years after the freaking events were supposed to take place.
Knowles first response Knowles: 500! Eyewitnesses! Neil tyson: i was on jury duty once and the judge forgot what i said 20 seconds ago Knowles: eyewitness testimony works when it benefits my beliefs
The '500 people saw it' is a weird one. The writer of the gospel wasn't present and wrote several decades later, that it was reported that 500 people witnessed the resurrection. Big difference.
777 witnesses to my 9.99 seconds 100 m sprint yesterday. No magic, not even a world record, but pretty good. Crisschunz working in any kind of sport business, I accept your sponsor money now. Thank you. (Remember, you are not skeptical about pure magic. NO skepticism needed then in this almost boring case)
His Tupac example is a poor example. In the '90s, there were people who claimed he didn't die but that his death was faked. People have claimed to have seen him still alive. More to the point. Every time I hear someone make the eyewitness claim, I say, "objection: hearsay."
I have eyewitness reports for my claim that Sauron is the evil and Hobbits, not Jesus, saved us. Let me show you my witnesses: "Arathon, Boromir, Gimli, Legolas, Elron,..." What could possibly be wrong with that type of argument?
Next week, Michael Knowles will destroy Newton and Einstein.
This is absolutely hilarious 🤣
You know he'd be delusional enough to believe that he actually had
@@TheMagicSkepticHey Wise disciple and Daily Dose of wisdom tried to convince people Turek won the debate but I'm sure you can debunk it
And he'll do it by quoting a passage from the Bible and reinterpreting it based on his modern knowledge, then claiming that the fact he can read unintended meaning into ancient poetry means the Bible invented science!
Exactly 😂😂😂@@TheMagicSkeptic
It wasn't 500 different individuals making the claim, it was one dude claiming 500 saw it.
Exactly. Claims about eye witness testimony are not the same as eye witness testimony.
@@TheMagicSkeptic Further more, the writer did not, himself, know of the 500. He was told about them by somebody else. That amounts to hearsay of hearsay, not evidence in any way.
@@henrybest4057 assuming that he got the creed from the person who said it first. It's more likely that this claim is Paul saying that someone told him that someone else told him that yet another person told him that 500 people definitely totally saw Jesus. Which is the bestest evidence there is for anything ever, obviously
If I was a witness to a miracle, I would actually write about it. It is funny that none of those actual "witnesses" wrote a thing about what they saw.... All we have is hearsay upon hearsay, which would never be admissible in court. And Hume and Hitch were pretty sharp fellas.... "ARE YOU KIDDING ME?"....
I would like Knowles to debate Bart Ehrman about this, he would lose his pants.
A beloved archbishop visited the small coastal town where he was born and raised. He asked the local pastor, who new to the area, to take him out on the water in the churches small rowing boat. After a while he asked the pastor to stop rowing, so they could just enjoy the ambience. Sitting in silence, the archbishop all of a sudden, calmly stood up in the boat, stepped out of the boat and took a couple of stepps across the water. The pastor, in awe and wonder of the miracle, decided to follow. Treading water, coughing, the pastor looked up at the smiling archbishop, who said; see, faith is not enough, you also need to know where the submerged boulders are.
In 1971 I went on a day trip to Amsterdam with my parents and brother, and while we were there we visited Madame Toussauds.
That same year a Dutch comedian did a hidden camera show at Madame Toussauds, where he posed as a waxwork of his famous character Dorus. We watched it on tv.
Years later my mother told someone at a birthday party that we had seen the comedian at Madame Toussauds. She was really convinced it had happened, and both my father, my brother and I had difficulty setting her right.
That is how easily people can misremember things they saw.
" Some stupid line from David Hume..."
Bless your heart, Michael.There are no stupid lines from David Hume. There are only lines you don't understand or comprehend.
Hume, but yeah....
@@tommonk7651 Fat fingers, small keyboard, farsightedness. 😆
Stupid words only out of the mouth of apologists like Knowles
@@FactStormYou wish
Hume cried out on his death bed, " I am in flames." They said his "desperation was a horrible scene." I wonder if he was experiencing where he was headed.
The fact that Michael Knowles even thinks he is in a league to critique The Almighty Hitchens speaks to Knowles’ desperate and delusional arrogance
😂😂😂Hitchens was an atheist clown. He exposed the Clinton's and the Bushes and Mother Theresa but he still was a silly atheist
Exactly!
I suggest you pray for Hitchens right now, for he surely needs them
@@CaptainDarrick yep he does need them, Hitchens is burning in hell for being a dumasss atheist...
Hitchens was a freaking moron.
Voddie would smoke his ass!!!
Ah yes, the first argument is one of my personal favorites, 500 unnamed, undocumented "eye witnesses".
You'd think for such an important event catching a few names for posterity's sake might have been a consideration 🤷♂️
Indeed. Classic assertive nonsense 🤦♂️
As I stated otherplace, if many eyewtinesses saw it, there should be more accounts for it as well. Or the eyewitnesses seem very suspect on their own.
I swear, a thousand people saw me doing absolutely nothing yesterday!
We also have claims from Kirsten people who insist they have seen Bigfoot and alien abductions.
Why don’t they take those testimonies into consideration more considering how recent they are in comparison?
Most people didnt know how to read or write back then did you think there would be a guy with a notepad writing down peoples names? Use some commo sense
They could debunk every atheist ever born by just producing their magical wizard and not the usual fallacies they claim to be proof but an actual testable confirmable entity. Claiming events were witnessed but providing no one to cross examine is just a bald assertion with a trust me bro. We’re supposed to just accept this from people with reputations of lying dishonesty distortion and fabrication. No thanks bro!
I couldn't agree more 👊
Can a fool 'make' a fool of himself?
@@DoctorOnkelap Definitely ups the odds of success
Prove using only the Scientific Method ... Evolution, Abiogenesis, a Big Bank 13.8 billion years ago, Inflation in a fraction of a second, Multiverses ... and how your Almighty Mother Nature made & enforces the Laws of Nature that Science relies on?
Good Luck.
Universal Functions is the hypothesis for all Machine Analogies used by Christians for over 300 years to explain "Intelligent Design" and it fully explains why every nation believes in "the gods" or spirit/soul and is the definitive proof that space, time, laws of nature, matter & energy are Natural Functions with clear purpose, rules & design (information) that can only come from the Mind ... of a very powerful Unnatural Intelligence. Hmmmmm?
If they could even demonstrate that our concept of a creator deity is actually possible in reality, I would at least consider its probability. They can't even do that. Much less can they demonstrate their particular creator deity.
I'd love to see this turkey debunk Hitchens face to face. It's a shame that will never happen.
1000% agreed
He would never dare say it if Hitchens was standing three feet away cause he knows Hitchens would destroy him.
If there were ever a candidate for resurrection, Hitch would be it. Michael would say "there you see, that proves resurrection is possible." Hitch would retort "Yes, but it also proves that you don't have to be the love child of a supernatural deity and a virgin to come back from death.
Or anyone halfway competent. He and his ilk like to go to people who haven't studied the Bible like others have(and who can blame them? All the begatting makes it boring) and can actually debate with knowledge.
I enjoy 'Liking' these types of vids for my online discussions with believers who think god is real. I do find it funny though when I mention other gods they pretty much stumble, say their god is the real one, and then leave.
There is a reason why he published this video on him after his death.
The nice thing about working Sundays is coming home to Magic Skeptic. You'd think people rising from graves would have been noted by every government
Exactly. There's resurrections left right and centre in the biblical narrative. Yet, we have no evidence beyond mere assertions.
Thats why the Jews don't believe in the resurrection
The gullibility of religious people never ceases to amaze me.
You people sit on your high horses looking down your nose at religious people. All design on this earth is no mere coincidence. Even AI could attest to intelligent design. Also, people in high places tend to worship the devil and you sit here and tell me God is not real. We pray for you all everyday.
@@shauny2206 The irony & obliviousness are always present when engaging with your apologist likes.
First of all, that's an age-old argument from incredulity..it's literally bottom of the barrel when it comes to arguments. You're an amateur, and clearly like most religious nuts - you have no idea what I am referring to. Look it up..
Secondly, you're the one sitting on your high horse, you're the one making supernatural claims and avoiding scrutiny by claiming faith & dogma..as if they mean anything.
Ah, the usual "ill pray for you" cop out..how pitiful. Prayers are useless superstitions, you dont have to be told that..but you do, so gullible. Children continue to die from cancer despite your useless prayers. Grow the hell up already..you are embarrassing.
Weird to say no dissenting voices exist when Judaism is still a thing
It's insane 😂
Michael, gurl, you've bitten off way more than you can chew.
Too right 🤣
Knowles thinking he can go up against Hitch? So adorable
@@I_Am_Monad I grew up in the south and with Designing Women on TV. I've pick up on way too many cliched responses
Counting the "witnesses" in the gospels is like counting the goblins in LOTR.
You don't have actual people, you have a book that says there were people.
Precisely. Well put 👏
Michael has to be right although more than 500 have seen Elvis
When doesn't Daily Wire fail?
u really dont know?
Financially.
In one of my online arguments with a believer about 12 years ago, I said to her a lot of things, one being that Jesus is a conglomeration of several gods from other cultures. She asked for proof, so I told her the gods that existed centuries before Jesus that did his "miracles". She was stunned. I then said that the god of the NT was different than the god of the OT. She told me to explain, so I did by saying that the OT god was vengeful, wrathful, and murderous. The god from the NT was loving and forgiving. She then said the spiel about how god changed. I replied with, "If god changed, then that means he is not perfect, which means he cannot be god".
She left after that. Wonder whatever happened to her. Watching this made me remember that for some reason.
The “more than 500” people ALSO needed to have known Jesus so well BEFORE THE CRUCIFIXION, that they could have identified him on sight..
..except apparently those arresting Jesus, could NOT, and even the Pharisees _(who all super hated him, but somehow didn’t know what Jesus looked like),_ needed Judas to IDENTIFY Jesus by kissing him..
…And all the years of Paul walking around yapping everywhere, not one of the “more than 500” ever said, “Hey Paul, what a coincidence..”
Let me put it this way, though I cannot promise that Knowles will understand this either:
How many attorneys and/or judges do you know are confident with accepting eyewitness testimonies and those testimonies _alone?_ If your answer is something other than "none," then how many of them do so without interviewing any, let alone all, of them directly?
Yeah, the "500 eyewitnesses" claim fails pretty damn hard.
At best, Paul reports a rumour of 500 witnesses having existed with no names, no locations, no way to find a single one, reporting them to people who had no ability to go looking in the first place.
As regards dissenting voices, there are dissenting voices right now that immigrants in Springfield, Ohio, are eating pets, and yet there is a large number of people who still believe it. Or that after-term abortions are happening in California.
And let’s not forget that the Church has had two thousand years of relative power in which dissenting voices were quietly removed…
Big deal, I can debunk Christopher Hitchens easy..
Hitch : - something profound-
Me : “Nuh uh!”
See? Easy peasy! ..unless ofc you want something comprehensible..
Now do Hume!
... rad name, BTW. Lol
@@littlefurrow2437 _"Now do Hume!"_
Okay! ..ahem.. mi mi mi la la.. ahem..
-Hitch- HUME : - something profound -
Me : “Nuh uh!”
whew..
Imagine if he attempted that while Hitchens is standing on a podium next to him!
We have 5 million witnesses who say Jesus didn't rise from the dead. What do you mean 'who are they?' & 'prove it'?!!!
"The 500 Witnesses is also a probable mistranslation" according to Ancient Historians
Could you elaborate? I'm not familiar with your claim.
@@TheMagicSkeptic Apparently, the Koine Greek used could be translated as a reference to 5 other texts rather than referring to 500 people who said they saw stuff. I'm unsure whether that's because it's the same words or just ones very close to the ones used, ie a spelling mistake like others in the old manuscripts.
Not the weirdest translation issue I've seen this week, even. There's a bit in OT where Moses didn't realise his face was different after talking to God. The word, "qa-ran" can be translated as "ray/column of light" or "horned".
So Michelangelo made a sculpture of Moses with horns because the Vulgate, the official translation into Latin, said Moses' face had horns coming out of it.
Modern English translations say Moses' face shone, was brilliant, glowed, etc.
It's so funny how Michael Knowles likes to debunk people no longer with us. No way to rebuttal. Now that is weak sauce.
They can't respond, that's why he's going after them!
Ah yes the 500 witnesses. There was Dave and Dave's dog then there was Jill accompanied by Jack. Bob was there of course and Steve, erm yes it seems a little hard to remember all the names so 500 sounds about right in a city of 60 - 80k.
The 500 were probably sheep in the field.
At the tender young age of 7 with squared bangs and buck teeth, this B.S. wasn't flying with me. I can't understand how people that learned the tooth fairy and Santa Claus was fiction can't finish the equation.
I saw Mark Twain give a lecture many years after he died, and there were at least five hundred others who saw him too.
It must be true 🙌
Lucky you.
I've talked to someone who said that they were told that 600 people saw Michael Knowles unhinge his jaw and eat a live baby whole in an airport men's room.
Plus, the hearsay aspect is exacerbated by the time passed between the "event" and Paul's assertion in Corinthians.
So nobody padded their resumes back then? Are we sure?
Good question 🤣
Let's weigh the intellect balance between Hichens and Knowles. Oh shit, it just fell off the table.
Paul wrote that he he *heard* that 500 people saw the risen Jesus.
Indeed. It's ludicrous to refer to it as eye witness testimony.
@@TheMagicSkepticSecond hand, at best!
@@ElizabethMcCormick-s2n Not even 2nd hand. Paul says it's part of the _creed_ he heard, meaning it was a narrative put together long enough before getting to Paul that it had _become_ a creed. To be 2nd hand, Paul would have to have spoken to 500 people. Instead, it sounds like he heard from someone (or several) the tale that those people had heard. At best, the people Paul spoke to were only 2 degrees of separation from the 500, that is, 500 people spoke to some person/small group who collected their testimony, they spoke about the collection to others, they turned it into a creed which the people Paul spoke to heard the creed.
And finally Paul heard the creed from them.
Not what you'd call trustworthy! Witnesses => collectors => creed makers => creed tellers => Paul. Worse than "some guy at the pub said"!
A Christian is simply a person who believes a Jew named Jesus Christ ... is the PROPHESIED Messiah from the Torah ... & PROPHESIED Only begotten Son of God from the Torah. You do not need the New Testament to believe Jesus is the promised Jewish Messiah & Son of God .... from the Jewish Torah.
Daniel 9 & Jonah state the Messiah will die ... 40 years ... before the Temple is destroyed and Hosea 6 states the Jews will be cursed for 2 x 1000 years for rejecting God's only Son, but over the last 1000 the Jews will return to God.
God told Man from the very beginning he has 7 x 1000 years to procreate, including the God (Son) ruling sinful Man for the last 1000 years. This is why the Sabbath is the 7th day of a 7 day week. The year 6000 of 7000 ... is 2030 ... as Jesus died 14 Nisan 30 AD starting the 2 x 1000 year curse on the Jews from rejecting God's Only Son. The Temple represented God on Earth with Man .. and ... the coming Messiah( God's Only Son). And the Temple sacrifices symbolized the Messiah being the pure passover Lamb to save ... anybody who believes ... from God's just nature. Once the Messiah died ( became the sin sacrifice) there was no more need for the Temple.
And the rest is up to every human being ... to freely follow & obey God (Torah) or Man(Ways, ideologies, religions, politics).
The Jews are under a 2 x 1000 year curse for rejecting God's Only Son. This ends when Jesus returns and is obviously the promised Messiah from the Torah and God's only Son from the Torah.
Only 6 more years to go. But Universal Functions destroys Atheism and all other religions that reject Jesus as the Messiah & Son of God.
When you are allowed to dip into magic(to shore up your case), what isn't possible?
It's amazing that Brett Cooper is seemingly the most reasonable pundit at the Daily Wire simply because she mostly does tabloid stuff for them.
is thaat the lass that looks like she could be ben sharpio's sister but is not related at all to him?
@@YoLo-bb2vc That's Ben in drag.
@@tetrapharmakos8868 i cant take you seriously with that comment there are notable differences between them but im more leaning on shitty father done silly things with two women.
saying its ben on drag is probably the worst thing nyone could have said based on the fact the facial structure while similar does indeed have some noticable differences enough to not be able to pull on in drag form.
Michael Knowles is not equipped to debunk anything, or anyone. He is a mental dwarf compared to a giant like Hitchens. To be honest, Knowles is a mental dwarf compared to almost anyone.
"Three men make a tiger"
If we grant him his reasoning on eyewitness accounts of the supernatural, doesn't that make Hinduism, Islam, Buddhism, etc, equally true?
Anyone who’s ever heard Mr Hitchens speak will understand he was a brilliant man.
don't take people who calls themselves ex atheist seriously
Agreed, just another pathetic ruse by sad liars for the baby jesus. Look I found jesus again and you can too, pathetic.
That isnt completely fair though, cuz we all start as atheist lmfao rofl, THEN we get brainwashed into religion/cultism
Why?
@@srenkongstad2992 because they usually mean: I didn’t think about religion most and stopped going to church for a while, which doesn’t necessarily mean they were actually atheist.
@@srenkongstad2992 It often means they stopped going to church for a while and didn’t think about religion, which isn’t the same as being atheist. And sometimes they just lie in order to pretend they know what it is like to be an atheist, and that being a believer is better.
Imagine if we found random letters from that time saying things like "You won't believe what I saw. Remember that preacher they crucified las week? Well I saw him! He is alive somehow."
What about Pontius Pilate writing on a report "There was this random preacher that many Jews wanted him dead for some reason. Well we did crucify him, and now people are saying he rose from the dead."
The only independent source we have, is Josephus saying that Christians exist... Like, yeah, we all know Christians existed, no one denies that.
It is not just misaprehension, it could simply be a lie. It does not have to even be "500 people" lying in a conspiracy, just one person lying about 500 people, when no one actually saw anything.
"Is that evidence"
Only in contexts where evidence is defined as any and all effort to convince a person of something.
Attorney: “Your Honor, we’re not talking about an individual eyewitness, we’re talking about 500 eye witnesses.”
Judge: “I’m not seeing these eyewitnesses listed here in your complaint.”
Attorney: “Well… it says right here in our book.”
Yeah, no, TheMagicSkeptic, this would never work with experts who understand what it means to provide proper supporting evidence - including credible experts or eyewitnesses.
A beautiful summation. Thank you 👊
Few people were educated enough to read and write back then, let alone fishermen.
Imagine trying to dunk on a man who has died years ago and still losing intellectually to him?
The funniest part is that Mary and the apostles didnt even recognize jesus after his supposed resurrection. They couldn't have mistaken him for someone who looked like him because he wasn't even someone who looked like him. What a ridiculous mythology 🤦
I didn’t realize you could make a living being stupid. I regret now that I might have been able to make so cash with my natural born talent. Nice play Micheal!
Of course he does this when Hitchens is no longer with us. If he did when he was alive Hitchens would make him look like a toddler.
It's like, when they pull out the "500 witnesses" thing, you know you're in for a ride. One akin to driving across the Nevada desert. "Cactus. Cactus. Cactus. Gee, another cactus, haven't seen one of those before." If you're going to convince anyone who knows what they're talking about, the 500 witness thing is never going to cut it.
My grandfather died. My brother and I went to his funeral. My brother was not aware that my grandfather had a twin, as they (twins) were somewhat estranged. So when he saw his twin (identical), he had a bit of a shock. So, imagine if I didn’t explain this to him.
Street magicians perform "miracles" in front of hundreds of people everyday. I doesn't mean they were performing literal magic just because hundreds of people saw the trick.
David Copperfield made the statue of liberty disappeared in front of thousands
Dude, it's NOT an "account." That term makes it sound like you're reviewing a historical account. That's not what this is.
This is a STORY. Just because it's from the Christian Holy Storybook, that doesn't make it any less of a story.
Please don't lend credibility to these far-fetched narratives, by calling them "accounts." Please help keep them in their place by correctly identifying them as "Stories!"
The simple fact that not a single religious person can get any God they believe in to show up and do God magic for everyone to see themselves here and now... not 100 years or 2000 years ago to a bunch of dead people
Circumstantial not circumspect… super different. Xx
Knowles: If we assume that the bible is true then that proves the bible as true.
It seems that way sometimes 🤣
I mean, that's basically what every Christian argument about the historicity of the Bible is based on. The concept of "circular reasoning" just seems to be entirely beyond their ability to grasp.
@@chameleonx9253and yet they completely understand what circular reasoning is when it comes to defining what a woman is.
@@RawrItsJuul It is ultimately kind of circular, though. A woman is basically anyone who meets a sufficient number of an arbitrary list of biological and/or psychological characteristics for others to identify them as "not a man," with that list (and which and how many points you need to qualify) being distinct to each culture and sub-culture within a society.
@@chameleonx9253 what I'm saying is that they (the people at the daily wire) completely understand what circular reasoning is when it comes to the argument "a woman is someone who identifies as a woman". Regardless of your argument my point still stands.
Still I don't agree with your position that woman can only be defined through circular reasoning. What about defining people on basis of these characteristics is circular? It is based on observable facts. Generally people innately understand and recognize the differences between men and women, from Europe to Africa to remote tribes in the far corners of the earth. Even if there are some exceptions, in this context we absolutely understand what is meant by women when people define that according to biological characteristics. It is not some vague nebulous term. I also don't really see the point in arguing the redefining of words that have always had a clear definition.
Exceptions exist in genetic mutations, that doesn't negate the rule, but proves it correct. In every case by using scientific means we can exactly determine what went wrong and observe the differences. Same as how they use the argument of the limbless person, and no one argues that normally humans have two legs.
Theists vs Hitchens.. like bringing a kitchen knife to a flamethrower fight. Look... I've a book here.. in it a Balrog revealed himself to Gandalf, Aragorn II, Boromir, Gimli, Frodo, Sam, Pippin, Merry and Legolas. So Saruman is real, Sauron is real, Morgoth is real. Start praying to Varda. (And I don't mean the Kuiper Belt object 174567 Varda)
In the recent Trent Horn vs A Mormon debate there’s an excellent sound bite in the middle where Trent admits the Bible contains no more than 3 eyewitness accounts.
It kind of reminds me of the Arizona lights when thousands claimed it was a UFO but the Air Force said it was flares I don't know I wasn't there
Using their claims to prove their other claims in the same collection, all to justify their hallucination.
Religious ppl truly live in the same Realm of God. The deIusionaI Realm.
4:45 Jesus walking on water could be a simple tight rope walking trick
Peter supposedly walked on water. That shows Christians 'can' have the faith to create miracles. Unless it's all not true.
3:49
Peter fell into the water when he looked down when Jesus said he shouldn't while holding his hand, it was not shallow or some 'trick'. Although the biggest miracle would then be the 'big bang', since something came from nothing.
@@McSmurfy what is more likely a trick or a wizard did with magic?
@@Mouth-of-Spaghetti The big bang is a pretty amazing and big trick, someone or something had to be behind, otherwise it is just ridiculous to say it always existed or nothing made it.
We’re talking zombies. Uh my thoughts and prayers.
I once knocked out Mike Tyson and I can prove it by telling you that 500 anonymous people actually saw me do it 20 years ago.
I doubted you until you provided all that eye witness testimony. Well done 👏
Hitchens mistakenly thought that Milkdromeda would form from two galaxies colliding catastrophically, instead of merging harmlessly.
It's good to be back
Apologists have tried to dismiss Hitch before by conveniently ignoring his second point (here, resurrection was a banality). Hitch's 2-part moral challenge - name a moral act exclusive to theists *_then_* name a wicked act which only theists could perform (pp 'you've already thought of one') - they struggle with the first part & ignore the second.
Both questions are easy. You just need to talk to a Christian who's thought about them for a while.
A moral act exclusive to theists - worshipping God simply for who He is.
A wicked act which only theists could perform - seeing God act in a situation and then claiming that the act had nothing to do with Him.
Unless you can think of an atheist capable of either of these while remaining an atheist, of course.
@@mikehutton3937 I suggest the challenge accepts that people remain in their current state of belief / non-belief as implied by the 2nd part of the challenge which shows the division between theists & atheists.
Peter and Paul should have look for Mary then they could have start a band called Peter Paul and Mary then they can make a song called Puff the Magic Dragon😂😂
Sees Michael Knowles in the thumbnail: "This ought to be a delight."
I hope it was a delight 😊
Instead of a god we only get more words from god believers.
"We're not talking you *you* being deceived, we talk about 500 eye witnesses being deceived!"
No, were talking about *one* guy who *claims* there were 500 eye witnesses and who might actually try do *deceive* you with that totally unsupported statement.
If that is what faith makes you, I'd rather remain atheist, thank you for trying, though.
27:32 everyone knows that Elvis and JFK dead, but some people still believe they’re alive and refuse to accept the truth.
When it comes to religion, it's impossible to debunk Hitchens.
If that's your view, you need to choose your heroes more carefully. Hitchens himself admitted to being bested on a number of occasions, usually ascribing his failure to not being prepared or a failure to investigate his opponent fully. Hitch was, after all, somewhat lazy and overconfident. Not to mention a rather better rhetorician than a philosopher.
@@mikehutton3937 That"s ridicules, the only way for an unbeliever to be bested is for god to literally show up in person in a peer-reviewed setting for all to see. No book, texts, or human on the planet can prove the supernatural.That’s ridicules, the only way for an unbeliever to be bested is for god to literally show up in person in a peer-reviewed setting for all to see. No book, texts, or human on the planet can prove the supernatural. I've watched Hitchens's debates and he always received the most votes. He wouldn't say the impossible.
@@mikehutton3937 "Bested" here and there in a debate or discussion is one thing, but debunking the central arguments Hitchens made is a different game altogether. Try it.
What is heroic about him is that he was one of the more articulate representatives of the atheist viewpoint.
Not rationally, you can not.
But then, there is the problem: You cannot reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into in the first place.
@@joshuaf.3723 *"You cannot reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into in the first place."*
This is a seductive line, but it's just not true. and shows that even folks who consider themselves pretty reasonable can be seduced by a well-turned phrase. In fact, many people who have held a view for bad reasons can come to realize they'd made a choice before fully comprehending the importance of good reasoning. Once they become aware of the importance of reasoning and the problems with accepting claims based upon how they feel, they can grow to become quite good at doing what they had once ignored. Many former believers can attest to this.
Blessed are the Cheesemakers!
And thank You, sir, for the content You produce.
I haven't watched yet, but I don't anticipate this going well for Mr. Knowles. Let's have a look . . . 😁
Brilliant podcast magic skeptic I really enjoy them keep them coming ❤
‘Nice’ to come the temporal lobe epilepsy fact. Same here, have experienced things that weren’t real.
Sometimes I wonder if I’d have been a saint 2000 years ago. 😂
please do a joint video with Professor Dave and let loose on the dishonest fools
I would love that 🥰
@@TheMagicSkeptic The poor theist would implode after your joint scolding. We need to raise the societal cost of dishonesty and gullibility and they way you call out the often absurd levels of ignorance or (self)deception is very needed.
1:12 I was VERY confused by the past minute because I didn't realise it was an intro, I thought you simply started your response there with the first clip.
(Edit) For reference, I watch with captions on mobile, and their placement almost entirely covers the "Later in the video" banner.
There's an island I visited in Turkey where you can walk in a straight line and the water comes up to your ankles.. But if you step left or right you'd fall into the deep water
500 (alleged) witnesses being deceived. You mean like on a regular David Copperfield show?
I love this comment 🤣
I love that you added WLC's infamous comment to your intro keep that s*** alive
To paraphrase Dale Allison, biblical scholar extraordinaire, "if you ask any question about the 500, we don't know the answer".
But good ole Michael knows, apparently!
The truth is, Christians do NOT like John 14:12-14 Christians say they believe in Jesus, yet can't do any of the great things Jesus has done. Again, Christians don't have the faith period! Either that or the NT is us just a fairytale story and NOT true. Wonder which it is.
Thanks
You're too kind. Thank you 👊
Knowles wouldn't have even been prestigious enough (and that bar was _trivial_ to get under) to debate Hitchens when he was around, yet he thinks he can debunk him?
If I didn't know Knowles was being serious, I would think he was a comedian playing the long con for comedy.
The most hilarious thing about the whole daily wire cast is how arrogant they are. Sure, they look witty and wise, arguing with 18yo college kids but put them against an actual intellectual, and they simply dont stack up.
Hitchens was the only god i believed in. 🇦🇺 😊
It's it grate when someone gose up against hitchens 😂 grate video as always
Thanks Callum ❤️
When I see people today arguing about crowd sizes in political rallies while there are actual recordings of the events, I really wonder why we should trust some shady texts written by unidentified authors about the son of god walking on water or healing blind people by spitting in their faces 20 or 30 years after the freaking events were supposed to take place.
Knowles first response
Knowles: 500! Eyewitnesses!
Neil tyson: i was on jury duty once and the judge forgot what i said 20 seconds ago
Knowles: eyewitness testimony works when it benefits my beliefs
The '500 people saw it' is a weird one. The writer of the gospel wasn't present and wrote several decades later, that it was reported that 500 people witnessed the resurrection. Big difference.
Perhaps "the waters you saw were peoples and nations and tongues" ...
Going after a dead person? That is low!
This is one of the less-low things spouting from this gobshine too.
And Michael still got owned.
@@nickguy8037 From beyond the grave!!!!!!
Can't wait to see hitches response
Can Knowles give us the names, addresses and phone numbers to all those witnesses?
OK! OK! Just names … just names are fine.
War is peace.
Freedom is slavery.
Ignorance is strength.
777 witnesses to my 9.99 seconds 100 m sprint yesterday. No magic, not even a world record, but pretty good. Crisschunz working in any kind of sport business, I accept your sponsor money now. Thank you. (Remember, you are not skeptical about pure magic. NO skepticism needed then in this almost boring case)
His Tupac example is a poor example. In the '90s, there were people who claimed he didn't die but that his death was faked. People have claimed to have seen him still alive.
More to the point. Every time I hear someone make the eyewitness claim, I say, "objection: hearsay."
I have eyewitness reports for my claim that Sauron is the evil and Hobbits, not Jesus, saved us. Let me show you my witnesses: "Arathon, Boromir, Gimli, Legolas, Elron,..." What could possibly be wrong with that type of argument?