In response to the first quote: Christopher Hitchens just convinced me to not take my networking exam tomorrow,. It's a multiple choice test, so most of the answers provided are bound to be incorrect. Therefore, it's only reasonable to conclude that none of them are right. Thanks, Chris!

@jacoblee5796

Жыл бұрын

WOW! Amazing how badly you could miss the point.

@TheSpacePlaceYT

7 ай бұрын

​@@jacoblee5796 What possible "point" could arise out of that quote that makes the argument have any rationality at all!?

@richardgomes5420

7 ай бұрын

False equivalence. The difference between multiple gods and your exam is that you know for sure that at least one of the alternatives of every question is true. In the case of deities, you don't know for sure that any of them are true. Even worse, chances are that all are false, since all deities are creations of the human mind when faced by the Unknown.

@TheSpacePlaceYT

7 ай бұрын

@@richardgomes5420 "since all deities are creations of the human mind when faced by the Unknown." That seems to be under the hidden assumption that all gods are created in our minds, which assumes the conclusion. It seems you're arguing in a circle.

@gabriellps2

6 ай бұрын

​@@richardgomes5420the very definition of god doesnt leave the door open to multiple faces. God can only be one. You keep saying this to avoid the actual question that is wether theres an endless being beyong our universe or not. If you want to question wether christianity is true that has nothing with the claim the god exists.

I'm an ex-atheist. The "many gods" objection convinced me until I realized Zeus, Thor and Odin are myths and Jesus was a real historical person! 😀

@sandstorm7768

Жыл бұрын

Lol that is a good point! Thank your for your openness haha. Honest historians will agree that Jesus of Nazareth was, at the very least, a real person. You can debate the validity of his miracles all you want, but you would be factually foolish to say "Jesus isn't real." Even the Romans and Pharisees who hated him agreed he was a real person!

@brianw.5230

Жыл бұрын

@@sandstorm7768 Jesus is the most important person in history for a reason.

@bandie9101

Жыл бұрын

i've got a children's lexicon when i was 6, and it was issued after the USSR regime. it started the "Jesus Christ" article as "probably was a real person". then i listened mass for years. you can not imagine how elevating was it when i realized it's not "probably", it's "certainly".

@twitherspoon8954

Жыл бұрын

@@brianw.5230 _"...and Jesus was a real historical person!"_ Provide the single-best evidence you have that Jesus existed.

@brianw.5230

Жыл бұрын

@@twitherspoon8954 the scholarly consensus.

22:30 Another great religious scientist is Luis Pasteur. He was a very devout Catholic. Here are some quotes from him: “A little science takes you away from God but a lot of science takes you back to Him… Question your priorities often, make sure God always comes first… Posterity will one day laugh at the sublime foolishness of the modern materialistic philosophy. The more I study nature, the more I stand amazed at the work of the Creator."

@TruePT

11 ай бұрын

Dang that’s a good quote!

@donatist59

6 ай бұрын

The quote is attributed to a number of people including Francis Bacon, but nobody knows who first said it. That being said, the statement has value no matter who said it.

@rafexrafexowski4754

5 ай бұрын

Another famous Catholic scientist (who was also an Augustinian monk) was Gregor Mendel, the creator of genetics and one of the most important 19th century scientists.

@pythondrink

2 ай бұрын

Pasteur basically just said "Always presuppose God."

one time, i asked my friend who hates Christianity with a vengeance, "if God exists and Christianity were true, would you become Christian?" (that's Dr Frank Turek's famous "test" question) he said, "no, because God would be a dictator. He let children suffer cancer, etc." I said, "how is God a dictator, when He allows you to NOT believe in Him?" radio silence after that. :)

@Bill_Garthright

Жыл бұрын

If Allah exists and Islam were true, would you become a Muslim? If Ganesha exists and Hinduism were true, would you become Hindu? If Satan exists and Satanism were true, would you become a Satanist? Frank Turek's question is pretty stupid, isn't it? How about one piece of good evidence that your god really _does_ exist? How about one piece of good evidence that Christianity really _is_ true? Just *one,* please, but specific enough and in enough detail that I can judge it for myself. Why is *one* always too much to ask? If _any_ god is demonstrated to be real, I'll no longer be an atheist. Whether I'd follow that god or not would depend on who that god was, what that god was like, and what he'd do to me if I _didn't._ Is your god going to torture me for eternity unless I kiss his butt? Then I'd probably kiss his butt. Wouldn't _you?_ Of course, Christians are all over the place on what they think about Hell - even about whether or not it actually exists. Some Christians tell me that _everyone_ goes to Heaven, with no exceptions. I assume that you're one of those people? _You_ clearly don't believe in Hell, since you think your god lets us not believe in him, huh? Well, I don't care about any of that, not without even *one* piece of good evidence any of this is actually true. So, again, how about *one?* Why is *one* too much to ask?

@HodgePodgeVids1

Жыл бұрын

Mic drop

@thehungarywaffleinc.7775

Жыл бұрын

That’s pretty good

@jkm9332

Жыл бұрын

Let’s just grant the idea that God is a dictator. Now what? He’s still God…

@thehungarywaffleinc.7775

Жыл бұрын

@@jkm9332 it is interesting because if God is a dictator, then that must be a good thing because He is the objective moral authority

The fact these older atheist like Harris and Dawkins get passed off as experts for the unbelief of faith is honestly appalling and shows how ignorant our culture is

@Bill_Garthright

Жыл бұрын

There are no "experts" at unbelief. It doesn't make the _slightest_ difference to me what Harris and Dawkins say. I was an atheist before I'd ever heard of them (I was an atheist before Sam Harris was even born!), and I'll continue to be an atheist as long as theists don't seem to have even *one* piece of good evidence that their gods are real. How about _you?_ Do _you_ have *one piece of good evidence, specific enough and in enough detail that I can judge it for myself,* that your god is real, rather than just imaginary? Just *one?* Why is *one* always too much to ask? PS. I'd also accept *one piece of good evidence* that _any_ of the magical/supernatural stories in the Bible actually happened. Just *one.* And I will _give_ you a guy named Jesus who was crucified by the Romans. Again, why is *one* always too much to ask?

@melchior2678

Жыл бұрын

OUR culture? What culture are you a part of? Now if you were to say "atheist culture" then I would agree 100%

@brianfarley926

Жыл бұрын

@@melchior2678 I’m talking about American culture embracing those idiots for being an authority on atheism

@ronbernardi

Жыл бұрын

​@@melchior2678 atheism has no culture it's simply stating that atheists lack evidences for their various god, gods and goddesses.

@melchior2678

Жыл бұрын

@@ronbernardi false. Atheist culture is pretty closely intertwined with gay culture.

I used to be atheist. I had no faith to speak of my whole life. I made the jump straight to Catholicism a bit over a year ago. It took me years of mulling things over to realize that God exists. Idk if this would be profitable to anybody but this is how my own mind went: I believed in objective morality because I felt I had to believe in that to believe that natural rights exist. I was conflicted because these are concepts that aren't tangible. I asked a fellow atheist how I could reconcile doing that when there's no physical proof to look at. I was told I had to "have faith". Hearing the word "faith" felt weird. Not weird to me now because I read Confessions by St. Augustine and he brings up the fact that numbers are intangible. I read Mere Christianity by C.S. Lewis. Haven't finished it but I got out of it what I needed to and the gist of it was that if morality is objective, then God is real. There's a lot more I could talk about with my conversion story but that's about as simple as I could get with it. I have to give credit to Our Blessed Mother Mary as well because I prayed the rosary while I was still atheist and I think she helped me make that final leap of faith to her Son.

@dyzmadamachus9842

Жыл бұрын

Thank you for your testimony.

@vtorious9102

Жыл бұрын

Congratulations my Brother in Christ, what a great story. When you pray the rosary as an atheist that's pretty boss, most Catholics don't even do that. Glad the Blessed Mother brought you here.

@kevinkelly2162

Жыл бұрын

So you believe in the objective morality of the Bible? So how many slaves do you have? Do you beat them correctly

@displaychicken

Жыл бұрын

That’s amazing my friend. Stay strong in the faith and keep learning. Trent’s channel is an invaluable resource for me.

@MetalMaster49

Жыл бұрын

Praying for your conversion to be blessed.

According to this logic of "one god further": I'm not married to approximatelly 7 bilion people. I'm married only to my wife. Any bachelor can tell me "you are as unmaried as I'm. I just go one person further in not-marring people."

@guym1234

Жыл бұрын

That is a horrible analogy

@Bartttttttt

Жыл бұрын

@@guym1234 because...?

@LauraBeeDannon

Жыл бұрын

I thought it was funny.

@vladislavbarbarii2089

Жыл бұрын

​@@guym1234 That could sound stupid only because the initial argument is stupid. The analogy shows that clearly.

@matthewoburke7202

Жыл бұрын

​@guym1234 it actually isn't stupid. The analogy actually perfectly demonstrates the logical flaw in the argument. The argument that atheists use is as follows 1. Christians are athiests when it comes to other gods. 2. Atheists are athiest when it comes to every God. Conclusion. Christians might as well be atheists to every God. Now, the second argument is as follows 1. Married people are unmarried when it comes to other people 2. Unmarried people are unmarried when it comes to every person Conclusion. Married people might as well become unmarried people. Same line of reasoning applies in both arguments. And in both cases, the conclusion simply does not follow from the premises.

To the statement given by Hitchens at 12:00 I remember when my mom had “the talk” with me, I was so grossed out and repulsed and said “I will NEVER want to have sex.” I thought adults were literally stupid and insane to WANT to do that. My mom looked at me and said “I know it’s hard to believe, but I guarantee you that once you grow up…you actually WILL want to.” I completely disagreed and thought she was totally wrong about me…but then I grew up 😂 and now it all makes sense…and yes, sex is something I do and enjoy doing. So even though never ending eternity of singing and worship and praise might sound dull and boring to me right now while I’m here on Earth…I have no doubt that once I die and go to Heaven, it is naturally ALL that I will want to do.

@Serasugee

5 ай бұрын

They don't seem to understand the "God can do anything" part. I'm pretty sure God can entertain even the most easily bored of people!

@purplesamurai5205

4 ай бұрын

This is a better response than the one given in the video. I wish he would pin this.

@jdotoz

21 күн бұрын

I was the same way, which is why I don't believe people are "born" homosexual - the seed of the desire might be there, but I doubt the desire actually is.

I think Ricky Gervais is funny, but his understanding of God is very immature; he stated he “realized” there was no God when his older brother was giving their mother a hard time about it and she didn’t argue with him, so she must have not believed. He (Ricky) was about 13. He never asked his mother if she just didn’t feel like arguing with his brother that day? He never asked if faith isn’t simple? He has the understanding of a 13-year-old.

@melchior2678

Жыл бұрын

Gervais is not funny. At all.

@jaegercat6702

Жыл бұрын

It’s a widespread problem. People learn about God and the Bible as kids, but they never allow their beliefs to grow up with them. They keep the “kiddy version” of theology through their whole lives.

@7swordquanta459

7 ай бұрын

Don't forget Stephen Fry.

@purplesamurai5205

4 ай бұрын

​@@jaegercat6702If I have a kid I'm going to go all out in faith education. None of the kiddy stuff. No Santa Clause. No Shamrock Holy Trinity. I will make sure he can debate adults. The mind is like a muscle. Just because you start out inflexible doesn't mean your mind can't be trained to do harder work. All it takes is practice, which modern kids with their non practicing parents don't have.

@PercydeRoloFangirl

3 ай бұрын

Even when I was 13 I still had more understanding than him.

Lmao Trent Horn with red laser eyes is mad funny 😂

@snowcat9308

11 ай бұрын

reddit circa 2015

I honestly feel like I could come up with better critiques of Christianity as a Catholic than 80% of the atheists (new atheists in particular) I encounter. They’re big fans of strawmen.

@Bill_Garthright

Жыл бұрын

Yeah? Well, I'm not a "new" atheist, since I'm 72 years old. Heh, heh. But I _am_ an atheist. From Nebraska, too. (I had to comment when I saw your name.) But my only critique of Christianity is that there seems to be no good reason to think it's actually _true._ After all, evidence is how we distinguish reality from delusion and wishful-thinking, and I've yet to see/hear even *one* piece of good evidence that a god is real - _any_ god, let alone yours. All I ever hear are vague claims from theists, not even *one* piece of good evidence specific enough and in enough detail that I can judge it for myself (not anything that holds up to scrutiny, certainly). Other than that, I can't really critique "Christianity," since Christians can't even agree with _other Christians_ about much of anything, even when they're all supposedly following the same magic book supposedly provided to them by the same supposedly all-knowing deity. So it's hard to tell _which_ "Christianity" to critique, you know? But how about _you?_ Do _you_ have one piece of good evidence, specific enough and in enough detail that I can judge it for myself? Just *one?* Why is *one* always too much to ask? PS. The first church service I ever remember was Catholic - back with it was all in Latin. Heh, heh. Wow, _that_ was a bizarre experience! We ended up going to the Methodist Church, instead. :)

@littledrummergirl_19

Жыл бұрын

Exactly why Aquinas is so great, he shores up the arguments against Christianity so well in order to refute them that his opponents said he made better arguments against Christianity than they did - and was still able to handily refute them lol

@gunsgalore7571

Жыл бұрын

@@Bill_Garthright So there's two big issues that you bring up, theism and Christianity. The evidence for theism is mostly abstract logic, whereas the evidence for Christianity is more historical. I should furthermore mention that I am an amateur, so make sure you look this stuff up for yourself, as these are both clearly very existential topics that carry a lot of weight. It's also best to look up experts on both sides, and really my favorite thing to do is watch a debate between two experts (there's a good one between Trent Horn and Alex O'Connor on theism that, while certainly not ending the discussion, did address some of your concerns). So theism first: is there a God? There are probably 1,001 logical arguments for the existence of God or a God-like entity (an intelligent, immortal creator being that has no beginning or end) out there, probably a good place to start is Thomas Aquinas's 5 ways. Some of his ways seem really dumb to me but others (like the argument from causation or motion) seem genius, so I guess you kind of have to look at it yourself and see what you think of his logic. There's other arguments as well, like the moral argument, which I also suggest you look up yourself because explaining any of these arguments would take up way more of my time than is currently available, as they are all serious philosophical stuff. There's also the kalam argument that Aristotle was a big fan of, I believe he also pioneered the first version of the argument from motion. Then there's the modal argument, which is a mathematical proof, but that one never made any sense to me at all so again I suggest you look at it yourself. As far as non-abstract, scientific evidence goes, things are more dicey, because God is a nonphysical entity. That obviously doesn't mean He actually doesn't exist, because lots of nonphysical things do actually exist, like your memories for instance, or the number two. But there is one serious piece of scientific evidence for God: fine-tuning, or the fact that life exists. Mathematically, the chances for the existence of any kind of stable universe are something like one in 10 trillion or something, because if the universe had expanded any faster or slower at all then it would have collapsed. So it's kind of like a guy in front of a firing squad with ten trillion men, all ten trillion shoot, but somehow the guy is still standing there after. Naturally, he's going to wonder why he's still there, and he might think there is a conspiracy, like maybe the men missed on purpose or something. In the same way, the fact that life exists at all is so unlikely that many people have posited that perhaps there IS something up there that wants life to exist. Now for Christianity. The evidence that Jesus existed is better than almost any historical figure from that time period. For instance, we only know that Alexander the Great ever lived due to two papers written about him like 400 years after the fact, and we only have copies of those histories from 400 years after they were supposedly written, whereas with Jesus we have dozens of different papers written about him by close associates and associates of associates within 100 years of his death, and we have copies of those written as early as a hundred years after they were supposedly originally published. For the ancient world, this is literally about the best evidence we have for anyone, other than maybe figures who had statues made out of them during their lifetimes. The second piece of evidence is that many of the people who claimed to witness the Resurrections (Peter, James, Thomas, for instance) were later killed for doing so. When given the chance to refute their beliefs, they didn't, continuing to claim that Christ had risen from the dead, to the point of being speared, stoned, and (in Peter's case) crucified upside down. This is very powerful eyewitness testimony, especially as the apostles had nothing to gain except martyrdom. And of course, keep looking into this for yourself, even the topics I've already mentioned, because I am just an amateur who spends too much time on KZread.

@DerPinguim

Жыл бұрын

@High Priest of the Flying Spaghetti Monster The five ways of Thomas Aquinas, definitevely. All "refutations" of it I've ever found just missed the points of the arguments entirely.

@mathfrom0to96

Жыл бұрын

​@High Priest of the Flying Spaghetti Monster How would that be a straw man?

"iF gOd rEaL wHy bAd tHiMG hApPeN!? 🤡" TrentH: "Oh BOY, am I glad you asked!"

@phillipcummings3518

Жыл бұрын

Tell me you haven't read Job without telling me you haven't read Job. 😂

@wes4736

Жыл бұрын

@@phillipcummings3518 - I know right? Scholars say that it's linguistically at least, the oldest book in there, and yet people think that this argument is novel? Lmao, it's only novel cuz it's been answered for like 3,500 years 👉😎👉

@Tzimiskes3506

Жыл бұрын

Lol. This channel called Orthodox meme squad posted a short by responding: "If God not real, why Good thing happen?"

@49erfanaticfromnm30

Жыл бұрын

​@@Tzimiskes3506 A better question is, "If God's not real, on what basis can we determine what's good or not?"

@raymk

Жыл бұрын

that's not how I talk!!!

Me: we're all Christians, i just believe in 1 more Jesus than u Richard Dawkins: your logic is outstanding. I submit

@eazy-cheez-e8033

Жыл бұрын

BHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA I read that in his voice too 😂

@paulnash6944

11 ай бұрын

*You may have outsmarted me, but I outsmarted your outsmarting.*

@MultiMustafa7

11 ай бұрын

Some people need an introduction to the Flying Spaghetti Monster to see how ridiculous they really sound.

@user-bp6zy3zx2n

10 ай бұрын

​@@MultiMustafa7do you have proof of the flying spaghetti monster? Contrary to popular belief there is far more proof for theism, and then, a next step, Christianity, than you want to admit.

@MultiMustafa7

10 ай бұрын

@@user-bp6zy3zx2n Yes, I do. There is massive overwhelming proof of the existence of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. It is evident in every atom of organic matter that has been touched by his noodly appendage. Scientists refer to it as the Field of Genetics. On a more serious note, If God really exists, and is everything theists claim he is, then all he has to do is come and say hi. Funny how the first to ask for proof is often the last to provide it. The Flying Spaghetti Monster is literally the bane of your belief; anything that goes for your god, goes for the big bundle of spaghetti and his noodly appendages. There is more proof for Theism than I want to admit? admit what? Bruh; go to a children's hospital. There, pray to God to cure a few of the ones clinging to life. Specifically the ones that have no chance of surviving; not the ones that'll 'miraculously survive by the hand of God', no. Specifically the ones that modern scientific medicine can do nothing for. Then, when your God mysteriously refuses to answer your prayers, have a nice time explaining how he works in 'mysterious ways' and how 'it is all preordained by the will of god', and it is 'good'. Solve the paradox of free will. Solve the problem of hell. Solve Euthyphro's Dilemma, or can it. There is less proof for the existence of your God than you'd like to admit.

I have two atheists in my family, and both of them denounce Hitchens and Dawkins as obnoxious bloviators.

@snowcat9308

11 ай бұрын

Haven't seen much of them but 2000s atheism definitely had a more hostile flavor to it. Nice to see more level-headed dialogue nowadays, for the most part.

@kebab3854

8 ай бұрын

Yeah, new atheism is just anti-theism

@thesnatcher3616

4 ай бұрын

@@snowcat9308 Some of the head figures may be more logical, but the fanbase is just as condescending and elitist as ever. The remnants of the "New Antitheist" movement are still left.

@snowcat9308

4 ай бұрын

@@thesnatcher3616 People on the internet are always going to be hostile as long as there is a screen between them and the person they're addressing. I don't think atheists are particularly special in that respect.

If GK Chesterton were alive he could take on all of these guys at once without breaking a sweat,John Lennox pretty much did this numerous times..we believe in Faith and Reason

I heard a good one on r/antitheistcheesecake about the first meme: Since not all ice cream flavors taste good, the conclusion is that all ice cream is bad.

Gervais, Harris, Dawkins, Hitchens....... whew!! these are emotional people. They are consumed by anger.

@phillipcummings3518

Жыл бұрын

Harris recently said he didn't care if Hunter had corpse's in the basement and that the laptop story needed to be silenced...

@choosejesus1910

Жыл бұрын

Angry at a God they don't believe exist🤷

@Bill_Garthright

Жыл бұрын

@@choosejesus1910 I'm sorry, but that's just stupid. No atheist is angry at a god. I'm not, certainly. Of course, I _am_ angry that faith-based thinking is destroying my country and my world. I _am_ angry that the Christian Taliban controls the U.S. Supreme Court. I _am_ angry at Muslim fanatics who murder atheists. (Christians have stopped burning us alive, at least.) I'm definitely angry at the actions of many theists - Christian, Muslim, Mormon, Hindu, etc. - based on beliefs which seem to be backed by nothing but wishful-thinking. That doesn't mean I'm angry at the supposed gods themselves, though. Because I see no reason to think that any of those gods actually _exist._ Tell me, please, do _you_ have one piece of good evidence, specific enough and in enough detail that I can judge if for myself, that your god is real, rather than just imaginary? Just *one?* Why is *one* too much to ask?

@mike-cc3dd

Жыл бұрын

And cheetos

@marcokite

Жыл бұрын

agreed! they ALL come over as being really sad, bitter people and angry at a God they SAY they don't believe in.

Thank you to whoever made that thumbnail; you made my day

I rememeber when I thought this "arguments" were genius and no religious person could refute them. I hadn't read a single book on theology in my entire life.

@champion1859

Ай бұрын

The idiocy of atheism never ceasea to amaze me

I can tell from the thumbnail I'm gonna love this episode!

@Jay-bp1yx

Жыл бұрын

Going to make a poster of this thumbnail for my future child’s room

@melchior2678

Жыл бұрын

I'll reiterate a comment I made about the thumbnail here. It's ludicrous that Trent portrays himself as some kind of comicbook superhero with superhuman glowing laser red eyes with superpowers he uses to defeat his opponents when his opponent's arguments are already weak to begin with. For somebody who wishes to be taken seriously by academics as a scholar, it just isn't a good look.

@melchior2678

Жыл бұрын

@@Jay-bp1yx great way to give your kids nightmares for the rest of their childhood.

@markofthepen

Жыл бұрын

@@melchior2678 Is this your first time on the Internet, good sir? The thumbnail in question that portrays Trent Horn with glowing red eyes is based on a kind of funny internet meme, so it is merely used to be funny - for the “hahas”, if you will. Therefore, there is no need, I assure you, to look too deep into these things when it comes to memes. God bless, and a pleasant day to you

Happy Second week of Easter

8:55 I think it is worth remembering an often-observed psychological trend regarding theists and atheists: many of the most passionate apologists in favor of Christianity have had very positive relationships with their fathers, while many of the most famous atheists have had negative relationships with their fathers, Christopher Hitchens included. From what I gather, the young Christopher regarded his father as an authoritarian and emotionally distant figure, which is not surprising considering he was a Commander in the British Navy, so I cannot help but think that his strained paternal relationship influenced how he thought about the Christian God. If someone's mental characterization of God is of a cosmic taskmaster, then that person is going to have a strong emotional motivation to be an atheist.

The "New Atheist" didn't have to engage and scoffing made them popular. Their charisma and personality made them. I think the newer atheist on the internet had to engage because the culture has changed and the internet atheist is now mocked using the "New Atheist" attitude.

@twitherspoon8954

Жыл бұрын

Jesus is a fictional character.

@conservativecatholic9030

Жыл бұрын

@@twitherspoon8954 is a fictional character

@junacebedo888

Жыл бұрын

@@twitherspoon8954 Anti-divine Bart Erhman and atheist Matt Dillahunty will laugh at you.

@twitherspoon8954

Жыл бұрын

@@conservativecatholic9030 _"twitherspoon is a fictional character"_ I have pictures of my birth, baptism, a zillion baby pictures, school, band, and sports pictures and records, driver and pilot license, college records, social security enrollment, income tax returns, passport, employment, voting, medical, dental, and vision records, credit cards, utility, phone records, mortgage and auto loans, legal records including court apperances, professional and business licenses and marriage certificate, my DNA can be traced to my extended family and geographically to my place of birth, and the internet protocol address used for this reply can be traced to me. But there is no evidence God was walking around town for thirty years. Jesus himself left no archaeological evidence of any kind, such as artifacts, dwellings, works of carpentry, self-written manuscripts or description of him. Wouldn't you think if a baby was recognized as God at birth, and met dignitaries, and this God was walking around town for thirty years, performing 36 miracles and raising the dead, and was publicly executed and then his body disappeared from a secure tomb, and then the graves opened and the corpses and skeletons rose out and walked into town, and the sun went dark for three hours, that someone at the time would have noticed and memorialized it in some way?

@twitherspoon8954

Жыл бұрын

@@conservativecatholic9030 If you have evidence that the Bible figure known as Jesus existed, provide it. However, it is an absolute fact that there is literally no contemporaneous evidence that Jesus ever existed. Paul made up the Jesus fiction in 48 AD after the Daniel 9:25 prophesy failed to fulfill. Shouldn't we expect that if God was walking around town for thirty years that the locals would have noticed at the time? Fun fact: none of the Gospel authors witnessed Jesus.

"With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion." - Steven Weinberg. This is one I still see today. When I was an ignorant young atheist, I use to give some credence to this, but I started seeing it again recently, now as a Catholic, and realized how nonsense this it upon just the most basic drawing out of conclusions based on it. One is just logical. If an atheist does something evil because he mistakenly thinks, or is duped in to thinking it is good, are we to say that the atheist is not merely ignorant, but evil? Apparently the religious person can remain good even while mistakenly doing evil things, while the atheist can't for some reason. How does that logically follow? Secondly, people can't simply be divided in to good and evil people. Hitler did evil things, sure, but prior to his political rise, he also stopped his entire life to take care of his sick mother 24/7 until her death. People have no problem pointing to the evil things he did and conclude that he is an evil person, but he also did good things too, so is he also a good person? The conclusion is that things are simply not that black and white. Thirdly, because of how black and white this quote makes things to be, the atheist has to believe he has never ever done anything evil, which is the height of narcissism, or to avoid declaring himself evil, he has to never change his mind about his moral convictions. It's to declare that atheists can never be ignorant or deluded about their moral convictions, but religious people can. This is just obviously false. Thirdly, since everyone does evil things, the atheist has to conclude that no one is a good person EXCEPT for religious people because they are the only ones who can do evil things and remain good. I doubt any atheist wants to accept that conclusion. This statement is just nonsense really, but yet many atheists just eat it up with out even thinking twice about it. I often notice that it's because of a sense of moral superiority.

@vincentthendean7713

Жыл бұрын

Anyone say that quote to you, just give him the 'ol 3 names: Hitler, Stalin, Mao.

@BoondockBrony

Жыл бұрын

@@vincentthendean7713 Throw in Pol Pot on there for good measure.

@richardgomes5420

8 ай бұрын

@@vincentthendean7713 I understood that you believe that Hitler, Staling and Mao are all good people, correct?

@richardgomes5420

7 ай бұрын

@@vincentthendean7713 HItler was a believer, by the way. Next time, replace Hitler by someone else.

@LegiondaryBro

6 ай бұрын

@@richardgomes5420 Hitler notably was not a believer in fact he was a believer in a form of Christianity he made up. he devoutly hated Christians and Jews. why atheists claim this just shows the lack of study and knowledge of denomination. Turns out when you change the Bible to what you want it to say like God said not to your logic falls apart.

I would love to see a video from you debunking Christopher Hitchens’ book-length hit-piece against Mother Theresa.

@jendoe9436

Жыл бұрын

Is that the same piece people use as “evidence” to attack Mother Theresa? I’ve seen bits and pieces of something floating around about her, but could never find the time nor motivation to look into it myself.

@jackolyte

Жыл бұрын

Yes, Hitchens was the main progenitor of the "Mother Theresa was evil" calumnies that have latched themselves onto popular consciousness

@gmenu8032

Жыл бұрын

​@@jendoe9436Looking more into it, there was a study done in 2013 looking into the criticism Mother Teresa faced called "Les côtés ténébreux de Mère Teresa." It's in French, but it talks about her "suspicious" management of money, fundamentalist views on abortion and contraception, and the unhygienic conditions documented by doctors in her homes for the dying.

@jhoughjr1

Жыл бұрын

That would be good I liked Hitch the most of the new atheists.

@jhoughjr1

Жыл бұрын

@@gmenu8032 it was India so that’s kinda normal for the time.

The logical Christian argument to refute this "one less God" claim would be to point out that atheism is "not a belief" (apparently, using their own words), but rather a disbelief in God. As such, it does not make sense to compare the two. Atheists may say they believe in one less God than a Christian, but the truth is that they are simply refusing to believe in the one God that Christians do. This is not the same as believing in one less God. This atheist argument is a joke, in the literal and figurative senses.

@newglof9558

Жыл бұрын

"You're a theist too. I'm just a theist to one god more"

@melchior2678

Жыл бұрын

Great points! 👏👍

@TheHimbeerjoghurt

2 ай бұрын

Also if you're cheating on your partner you're not really cheating. Because after all you're partner is only sleeping with one person fewer than you so you're doing basically the same.

3:43 "Since it is inconceivable that all soccer teams are the best, the most reasonable conclusion is that they're all the worst"

I love this channel so much 😭

I used to fear that Heaven would be boring as a child, but it is so absurd to believe that eternity in paradise with the God that made everything we know and love and designed our very senses and affinities would turn out to be lackluster...

@Bill_Garthright

Жыл бұрын

Right. You can be confident that Hell is filled with parasites, cancer, turds, and other wonderful stuff, huh? :) Luckily, since it all seems to be imaginary, you can imagine whatever you _want._

@DigitalLogos

Жыл бұрын

​@@Bill_Garthright Imagine a square circle. I don't mean conceive of it, but IMAGINE it. Picture it in your mind. Congrats, "you can imagine anything" has been refuted.

@sandstorm7768

Жыл бұрын

The Scriptures say it will be without sickness or death, it will be solace, it will be where God "wipes every tear from our eye." It is not sitting on clouds and singing hymns all day. It is full unity with God, which means it is all the best parts of life. Family, friends, laughter, food, etc. We will have new bodied as well! Hell is rejection of God. Therefore it will be everything bad in the world. All the worst parts of life. Pain, warring, bitterness, greed, etc. That's why God DOESN'T want us to go there.

@sandstorm7768

Жыл бұрын

@@Bill_GarthrightAs I said in my other reply, yes, Hell will be all the worst parts of life, because it is the realm of rejection of God. "Seems imaginary?" You wish it was, friend. Everyone who has died and been revived and seen Hell in the process consistantly say: *I never want to go back there again.* They relay nothing but pain and terror and fear. You don't get what you want by imagining God doesn't exist. He's been our living reality for 2000+ years. Men older than us and wiser than us have believed He is real. I take that with great humility.

@awuriefnejqwjmnwn4960

Жыл бұрын

​@@Bill_Garthrighthell is not a place of physical torture, your condescending attitude in face of your glaring lack of education is an embarrassment to yourself. Mockery is the best way to prevent yourself from openly engaging with something. Are you afraid you may find out that god is real and objective morals are too?

Just realized trents intro music sounds a bit like the wii sports song

@mike-cc3dd

Жыл бұрын

I'll never not be able to hear that

@jbar1

Жыл бұрын

Good.

@pulsar403

Жыл бұрын

His logo also looks like a mii.

@yeetmaestro575

Жыл бұрын

We demand a Trent Horn Mii character

@cosmicnomad8575

Жыл бұрын

@@yeetmaestro575 I 100% want to see this

"Belief without proof bad. Faith for lazy. No need think or check proof. Faith coward move. People believe more when no proof." -- Caveman Dawkins

@melchior2678

Жыл бұрын

Sounds more like Big Chief Redskin Dawkins

@ungas024

Жыл бұрын

Sounds like atheism to me. 😂😂😂

@snowcat9308

11 ай бұрын

@@melchior2678 Ah. Anti-science *and* racist.

That skydiving analogy around 19:00 is awesome! Thank you so much Trent!

@killianmiller6107

Жыл бұрын

People can say they believe things because science has revealed it and leave it at that, as to say reason prevails; but often they forget or don’t realize that they are putting faith/trust in the scientist to have done their job properly without malice or mistake. Reason can only take us so far, eventually our full assent to a truth requires trust.

@ironymatt

Жыл бұрын

​@@killianmiller6107... and also the third party who relayed the data from the scientists to the person. The vast majority of what we know wasn't acquired directly from the doctor in the lab. "Science reveals..." is a religious statement

Your content has been absolutely excellent lately. Keep up the good work!

As a Muslim, thanks much bro. I loved this. May you have a blessed day. And God continue to bless you to demonstrate His existence.

@dmech7171

Жыл бұрын

So are you ready for hell

@lothara.schmal5092

9 ай бұрын

@@2tallyGr8 It is also one way to guarantee no one will ever take them seriously lol

@Bvillalba413

7 ай бұрын

​@@dmech7171Yoo chill

@lapis_lazuli578

4 ай бұрын

also a muslim, and really enjoyed this too!

I love the way how, you ALWAYS have a clear explanation for our brothers being all the time Kind. Thank you Trent 👏🏻👏🏻

Truly incredible thumbnail

Is someone going to tell Ricky Gervais that we lost the invention of Greekfire with the Byzantines?

MORE...! You need to to an entire ongoing series on similar memes/quotes, Trent... because, as I'm sure we all know, there are oh so many many more to debunk! But, great job, as always.

Thanks Trent. This is helpful. Keep up the good work.

"I dont believe in round earth" "What? How can you not? "Well do you believe in cubic earth? Do you believe in square earth? Do you believe in exagon earth? I just don't believe in one more geometric form than you. You are just as flat earth as me"

Happy Easter

@melchior2678

Жыл бұрын

It's over now. But since you mentioned it, why do Catholics celebrate Easter on the same day as Protestants?

@Matt-1926

Жыл бұрын

@@melchior2678 I'd probably say Protestants celebrate on the same day as Catholics. I'm pretty sure Catholics celebrated Easter long before Protestants came on the scene. Gods Bless

Trent your thumbnail game has been great!

Excited for your new videos!

It feels like atheists like Dawkins use their academic title and British accent to make them sound profoundly intelligent, and thus you should believe them. If you disagree, it's because you're not smart enough. I find it a smug and arrogant position.

These quotes have the vastness of an ocean but the depth of a puddle. They seem greater then what they truly are.

You are such a based chad, more atheism stuff please

@melchior2678

Жыл бұрын

"Based chad"? If Trent is an effective apologist and/or eminent scholar why not say so instead resorting to juvenile buzzwords like " chad" ? Is it typical of Trent's audience to use such trendy child language or is this just a fringe example? I mean you already have about 25 likes in less than 24 hours so I'm assuming it may be typical.

@melchior2678

Жыл бұрын

You know what? Now that I think of it, this all makes sense when looking at the thumbnail of this video. Trent portrays himself as some kind of comic book super hero with glowing red eyes as though he possesses some kind of super powers that he uses to subdue his opponents, which is ludicrous really when taken into account how weak the arguments of his opponents are already.

@ComicRaptor8850

Жыл бұрын

@@melchior2678 bro it was a youtube comment

@ironymatt

Жыл бұрын

​@@melchior2678on the compliment being of a sophomoric nature, you're not incorrect. Regardless, the greater point is that it's a compliment.

@henryvdl3692

Жыл бұрын

@@ironymatt mate, calling someone a based chad is a bloody good compliment. I'd be honoured.

Trent, thank you for doing this! God bless you!

I like how Trent connects evangelical firebrands to atheist firebrands. I've also found that they just go from one ship to the other. I've had atheists for example use evangelical polemics against me.

“Richard Dawkins doesn’t know the difference between metaphysics and Metamucil” Edward Feser

@bandie9101

Жыл бұрын

or the difference between metaphysics and Metaxa :D

From a Catholic perspective, I believe there's a better response: Catholics believe that every single god ever worshipped exists, it's just that apart from the one true God who created the universe, etc.. they're all demons, not really gods.

@elf-lordsfriarofthemeadowl2039

Жыл бұрын

Some could've been, but I think idols were just objects

@ishashka

11 ай бұрын

I don't think that's the case, *some* pagan deities were very obviously demons, but others were probably made up. Chesterton makes a distinction between 3 types of paganism in The Everlasting Man: mythology, philosophy, and demon worship. In his opinion mythology was pretty much make-believe, stories to make the world more interesting. Philosophers tried to figure out what makes the world tick, and usually coexisted with mythology while operating in a completely different framework. Demon worship on the other hand might bear some similarities to mythology (namely the belief in many deities), but it mostly occurred in very advanced civilisations (like Carthage), involved much darker practices (like human sacrifice), and were transactional in nature (someone offering an animal to Zeus did it because of tradition and maybe some sense of obligation, someone offering a child to Moloch did it expecting the prayer to be answered, or in other words they "bought" a certain outcome). The last point is pretty interesting because even though mythologists prayed to their gods for stuff too, it was probably something of a wishful thinking - maybe it'll come true, maybe not, the gods are unpredictable. Demons on the other hand were considered much more effective, which might be because they're real while the gods of Olympus are not.

@martinarooney228

5 ай бұрын

Disagree in peace, I'm Catholic and I don't believe that every single 'god' worshipped existed. Not everything is demons.

@John_the_Paul

Ай бұрын

@@martinarooney228that’s because it’s always aliens

That Ricky Gervais quote made me an atheist, I'm glad you discussed this. I'm always scared of these statements since I'm scared my faith will be shaken

@user-bp6zy3zx2n

10 ай бұрын

Brother, I implore you to do more research on the solid scientific and philosophical evidence, and also historical and archaeological evidence, to strengthen your faith. And trust the Lord! If such silly rhetorics that hold no weight can shake your faith, you must surely strengthen it! God bless!😊😊😊

Thanks for the dose of satisfaction on this Sabbath day brother. Hearing others speak the truth, logic etc may as well be my crack 😂

Thank you for such an entertaining episode! Of course also filled with such intelligence. :)

Excellent work Trent

Thank you for this!

Dear Mr Nathan, keep up the great work.

One thing I've been doing lately is to ask atheists what characteristics unite all gods in their "godness" and distinguishes them from things that are not gods. Seems like a simple question to me. I weirdly have yet to get a coherent answer.

@HodgePodgeVids1

Жыл бұрын

What is the most common responses? I might try this

@newglof9558

Жыл бұрын

​@HedgeHodge a big response is "God has been defined in so many ways throughout history so I can't answer this", which I respond "so you don't know what it is you actually reject? And you don't have criteria set that would change your mind? You effectively just admitted you argue in bad faith." Other responses are "something worshiped", which I respond "so the Grateful Dead are gods then. They unite a bunch of unrelated people in an experience of joy and occasional mysticism." A better response was "personal", although it's not all encompassing and would necessarily exclude things like the Tao or Neoplatonic One

@newglof9558

Жыл бұрын

​@@HodgePodgeVids1 if you keep pressing and the interlocutor is good faith, you eventually get to excluding pretty much every pagan pantheon.

@HodgePodgeVids1

Жыл бұрын

@@newglof9558 And then they start to see the Judeo-Christian God is unique and distinct from all the other non Abrahamic religions

@newglof9558

Жыл бұрын

​@@HodgePodgeVids1 I wouldn't say it gets that far (you'd have to edge out Islam) but like Trent said, it narrows it down considerably and gets the gears turning outside of meme responses.

Completely agree that some of these are easily dismissed with only a few moments of thought. Thanks for this video Trent; it addresses a bit of a sore spot for me lately.

@Bill_Garthright

Жыл бұрын

Well, it's always easy to cherry-pick "quotes and memes" from a group - atheist or theist alike - and dismiss them. Obviously, if he _couldn't_ do that, they wouldn't be included in the video. Because he's just picking out whatever he _wants._ I would just ask him - or you - for one piece of good evidence that your god is real, rather than just imaginary - just *one,* but specific enough and in enough detail that I can judge it for myself. Because that's why I'm an atheist. Likely, it would take more than one to convince me, but I can't even take it _seriously_ without even *one.* And it's always just vague claims, indistinguishable from wishful-thinking. Worldwide, faith-based people _overwhelmingly_ tend to believe in whatever religion and whatever god or gods they were taught to believe as a child. That's exactly what we'd expect if all gods were just imaginary. It's certainly *not* what we'd expect if there really _were_ a god who wants people to know that he's real, don't you agree? But if theists had actual *evidence* that their beliefs were true, that would be different. As far as I can tell, they have nothing distinguishable from wishful-thinking, though. Or do _you_ have something distinguishable from wishful-thinking?

@littledrummergirl_19

Жыл бұрын

@@Bill_Garthright dude, he’s gone in depth while strongman-ing atheist arguments so many times, just watch some of his videos. Bold of you to call him “cherry-picking” when you don’t even mention (or don’t bother to look for) his videos that disprove the claim you just made against him. All he did was address a couple of particularly weak atheist arguments and give us some understanding of them so we can have that knowledge going forward, just like he’s done for STRONG atheist arguments. He’s also done legitimate debates with atheists, so 🤷🏽‍♀️

@whatever1068

Жыл бұрын

​@@Bill_Garthright "Quotes and memes" is in the title. So he's doing what he says he will do. If the video was about disproving atheist beliefs and proving Christian ones the title would be "Disproving atheist beliefs and proving Christian ones"

@Bill_Garthright

Жыл бұрын

@@littledrummergirl_19 OK, so... *nothing,* then? Well, that's why I can't take your religious beliefs seriously. It's not just _you._ As far as I can tell, it's _every_ theist - certainly every Christian and Muslim I've ever talked to. Claims are easy. That's why _every_ religion makes claims.

@Bill_Garthright

Жыл бұрын

@@whatever1068 _"Quotes and memes" is in the title._ Yeah? So what? How is that a reply to _anything_ I said in my comment?

Another excellent video

Thank you Trent.

Trent, my favourite response is if a vegetarian argued "we are all vegetarians when it comes to elephant meat, I just go one more meat than you" 😆😆😆

@angelalemos9811

Жыл бұрын

😆😆😆😆😆😆

@snowcat9308

11 ай бұрын

That analogy makes zero sense lmao

Thank you for this video! I am a bonafide midwit and this kind of sophistry ties me up in knots.

Good video keep up the good work

You have a beautiful Icon back there, i painted this one once ❤

22:03 That's the problem - since Gervais obviously doesn't believe a Creator could ever reveal Himself even _once,_ he of course disallows the possibility of Him ever doing it _again._ It's circular reasoning. He grounds his whole argument - from the outset - on the proposition that it was a "fiction" - i.e., that the revelation didn't _really happen._ And then (in a way that only he and people who _already agree_ with that premise find convincing) goes on to conclude that what was "clearly" impossible back *_then_* would still be impossible *_today._* Totally circular. It couldn't be more circular if he used a math compass. Furthermore, if such a text-destroying event were to occur, and a Creator *_were_* to reveal the Truth in the present day, why *_would_* it appear "just as it was", as Ricky demands? If this Creator used - back then - the people and culture and language *_of that era_* to reveal the Truth (by reference to the events of that time, and shepherds and oxen and cubits and Caesar and whatnot), why would such a Creator now (if it were necessary to reveal the Truth again) be limited to using the very same subject matter and imagery? Methinks this Creator would probably communicate with 21st century people in a 21st century way, no?

Can you do a video on the different kinds of faith. For example here you talk about faith as trust. Is that how you would define the theological gift of faith? I know you weren’t intending to define the virtue but I think a distinction on the uses of the word faith would be helpful. Thank you Trent!!

I’m glad you mentioned Rationality Rules. I enjoy his channel.

Please do more of this! Also please do some more Bible history stuff (:

@martinkuliza

Жыл бұрын

BIBLE HISTORY ???? is there such a thing History is History, The bible has nothing to do with that

@snowcat9308

11 ай бұрын

@@martinkuliza Of all the comments to go after in this comment section, this is like the least objectionable one lmao

@martinkuliza

11 ай бұрын

@@snowcat9308 LOL its funny though, it's like saying The History of the Seven Dwarfs or The History of Cinderella THERE IS NO HISTORY OF THAT The thing with the bible though is it contains fragments of facts, such as egypt existed, Ethiopia existed but then since it did and they have a history you can't just spew some bullshit and say this is bible history Here is bible history Once upon a book was written to control the masses they fell for it and it generates lots of money, THERE YOU GO... BIBLE HISTORY

@lothara.schmal5092

9 ай бұрын

@@martinkuliza "Hey mister Homer specialist guy, please do more odyssey history content" -History????? History is History, the Odyssey has nothing to do with history

@martinkuliza

9 ай бұрын

@@lothara.schmal5092 "Homer Specialist Guy " ??? LOL...... What the fuck, Where did that come from ? History is History, the only thing that the bible has to do with history is............ IT WAS WRITTEN AT SOME POINT The problem is, it's not god's word it's the word of the one that wrote it (The publishing companies that put it together) the bible itself as a book, Is not a record of what happened in history

The "one less god" thing is atheists not taking their ostensible beliefs seriously. There would still be obvious material differences between two identifiable social groups. Even different atheists can have fundamental philosophical disagreements. If it all boils down to materialism and we make God rather than the other way around, what's their problem?

I see you've accepted Gavins Thumbnail challenge ;p

5:32 My name is Thaddaeus and it was really jarring to hear it randomly in a KZread video given how uncommon it is. Thanks Trent.

Thank you Trent! God bless you.

I was about to mention that those new atheists are responding to fundamentalists (mostly of the various heretic persuasions), but then you mentioned that Dawkins just swapped his own previous fundamentalism for another one.| Regarding Blessed Steno, he was son to a Lutheran goldsmith, studied medicine either in Amsterdam or Kopenhagen, then went to Firenze to become Federico II physician. While in Florence, he was astonished by the beauty pf processions and other public displays of Faith, leading him to conversion. He is an anatomist, he had the duct from the salivary gland named after him. He also had a disagreement with Newton regarding the workings of the brain. The he wrote about Geology, stablishing the principles that are uncontested to this day. He was ordained bishop and his remains are in the Basilica of Florence.

People who can't imagine the joy of being in heaven haven't been madly in love in their life. And for those who have, just imagine that feeling is nonstop, and there's no disappointment or heartbreak. Heaven is not about sitting on clouds and playing harp.

@ArchlordZer0

Жыл бұрын

Is there free will in Heaven?

@thefiringsquadtfs6392

Жыл бұрын

@@ArchlordZer0 yep

@ArchlordZer0

Жыл бұрын

@@thefiringsquadtfs6392 Can I slap someone in heaven?

05:42 that "..what?!" kills me😂 also at 07:33 "what are you talking about?"

“HOPEFULLY it’s not just yourself” Many Atheists sadly do what you hope they don’t do.

@TheCounselofTrent

Ай бұрын

Thanks for the comment! -Vanessa

"Me have wand, me say "go away" to one thing: rape or religion. Me choose religion. No wait. Me choose religion now." -- Caveman Harris

The funny thing about Dawkins is that biologists say "He's a crap biologist, but he's great with the atheism!" (They used to say the same thing about Steve Gould)

@jhoughjr1

Жыл бұрын

Dunno who would say that. The selfish gene was pretty illuminating and biologically true

@melchior2678

Жыл бұрын

@@jhoughjr1 false

Thank you Trent

Niels Steensen/ Nicolas Steno was a Danish scientist, a pioneer in both anatomy and geology who became a Catholic bishop in his later years.

The problem of evil for atheists: What is evil without good? And what is good without God? Great video, Trent.

@snowcat9308

11 ай бұрын

"Evil" is what our society (or even the individual) determines to be bad for social cohesion. "Good" is what our society (or even the individual) determines to be good for social cohesion. Please tell me if I need to elaborate.

@Mark-cd2wf

11 ай бұрын

@@snowcat9308 So when Hitler (an individual) and the Nazis (a society) said they were purifying the Aryan race when they killed their millions, we should believe them, right? After all, who are we to push _our_ morality on _them?_

@snowcat9308

11 ай бұрын

@@Mark-cd2wf No, I never said we should just take everyone's word equally. If your morality causes you to being undue suffering to people, ideally you should and would be stopped. And we a decent people who don't wish to our fellow humans suffer. That's who we are to "push our morality on them". Who is a police officer to stop a thief from stealing? He's going to stop this person because of the harm that theft brings to society, not because of some deeper moral imperialism he's trying to enforce on an innocent theft believer. Just because morality is relative, doesn't mean that each moral framework deserves the same respect.

@Mark-cd2wf

11 ай бұрын

@@snowcat9308 Why? How are we to judge between societies if, as you say, morality is relative? We can fight the Nazis because we don’t want them to conquer and kill us, but we _can’t_ say what they’re doing in the Holocaust is really _wrong._ For who says undue suffering of others is wrong? Why should I care about “the good of society” instead of Old #1? If I choose to amass enough power in this life to do whatever I want, who are you to tell me I’m being selfish? What if I don’t _care_ if I make others suffer? If morality is relative as you say, then all you can say about my selfishness is that you don’t _like_ it. Not that selfishness is wrong. If there is no God, then what Hitler did was merely a matter of opinion.

@pythondrink

2 ай бұрын

There is no problem of evil for atheists, at least not for moral nihilists. Evil and good are just concepts.

You are such a based chad, more Anglican stuff please

Thumbnail on point

You are my favorite apologist now, next to inspiringphilosophy

Your crime analogy rings very well, though I think it misses a central point- a crime having been committed in the first place. The atheist may say that the guilty party doesn't exist (accident, suicide, natural causes death) whilst the theist is proposing a more specific alternative. The atheist doesn't believe that the idea of a killer in this instance checks out given the evidence, whilst a theist may. An atheist may point out that there are no indicators of inflicted wounds or poisoning on the victim, whilst a theist could point out that the victim had lots of people meaning ill-will to them. Overall I think it is a good analogy but did miss that the base thing that the atheist is really commenting on- grounds for belief in the murderer/god's existence in the first place. 'One less god' makes sense in a world where a god typically doesn't make sense to begin with.

@bandie9101

Жыл бұрын

^ a good one

Great response to the "paradise" argument. I've questioned that concept myself of how am I going to WANT to praise God all day and night for eternity? I would think of a comparison such as taking a vacation in a beautiful place, no matter how amazing, but after a couple of weeks, feel I've had enough, and wanting to go home. But my mind here on earth can't grasp the infinite "awe, wonder, and gratitude" I'll experience in my new body, leaving me with only one desire...to praise God continuously. Only God can accomplish that.

@susand3668

Жыл бұрын

I like Trent's response. But if you need to imagine in a concrete way, maybe try imagining you are on a vacation to every place you ever wanted to visit, at the same time as being Home?

Jimmy Akin came up with another good response to the ‘loss of all religious books’ argument. He points out that the religious texts would be almost immediately re-written by those who remembered them. Muslims would be especially good at that. It is a highly prized skill in Islam to memorise the Quran. But there are also Christians who have memorised much of scripture. There may be some who have memorised it all? Those people would get together and use their eidetic skills to reconstruct the lost texts of sacred scripture.

@TravisHi_YT

11 ай бұрын

I think the argument is "because it's fiction it will be different" vs "science is always the same". Jervais' assertion is a bit meh, because the scientific books will be different, but will end up with the same result. However I suspect that the same would be true for religious scriptures.

It's interesting to see how everything i was tought to believe by 2011 atheist KZread that seemed so rational is so easily destroyed

LoL, as an atheist I loved this video. I hate how people like Dawkins and Harris are the faces of Atheism instead of people like Alex O Connor and Graham Oppy.

@pythondrink

2 ай бұрын

He straw manned some of those or misrepresented their purpose as if they were supposed to debunk God

I cannot believe Sam Harris said something "not so smart"(to put it politely) ... again.

I'd love to have seen Trent vs Hitchens

Regarding Gervais’ claim about science books, I think a stronger case could be made by reference to Thomas Kuhn’s work demonstrating science’s dependence on the creation of the categories used to measure the world which are themselves dependent on history and epistemology

Ray Comfort and Lee Strobal are the best at converting Athiests.. Joe Rogan, Ricky Gervais, Ben Shapiro are famous antiChrists that need good Godly theologians & dialogue..

@quint2857

Жыл бұрын

Pro child predator Ray Comfort? Are you kidding? Hes a monster.

@melchior2678

Жыл бұрын

Never heard of Strobal. But Ray Comfort and Ben Shapiro have something extremely significant in common.. They're both Zionists. And I wonder if Trent Horn is also. It wouldn't surprise me.

@burntgod7165

6 ай бұрын

Comfort and Strobel are embarrassing. Comfort doesn't understand anything; he is banana man. Strobel's The Case for Christ is a litany of fallacies. You're better off with Council of Trent or WLC.

@pythondrink

2 ай бұрын

Ray Comfort? Lmao you must be a bastion of irrationality and a fallacy machine if you think so.

"Many gods not all right, maybe all wrong" -- Caveman Hitchens

@ironymatt

Жыл бұрын

... many answers 2 + 2 wrong there no answer

Nice thumbnail lol 10/10

22:34 Proud of him. Proud Pole.

If I wanted to explain what I believe about God, I would start with theism, then I’ll narrow to Christianity, then I’ll narrow finally to Catholicism. All the faiths that purport belief in some kind of God disagree on the latter two questions, not the first. So when atheists may say “I believe in one god less” they are taking from the latter two and concluding on the former, taking disagreements about god(s) and concluding there is none.

@Bill_Garthright

Жыл бұрын

All of the faiths that believe in a god believe in a god? _That's_ what you're saying? Heh, heh. Sorry, but can't you understand why that's not a valid argument?

@resvero8342

Жыл бұрын

@@Bill_Garthright Why do you think you are smart, cause you aren't

@killianmiller6107

Жыл бұрын

Yea basically, that’s kind of a premise 1. Atheists don’t believe in a God, so by saying “I believe in one god less” they make a category error.

@Bill_Garthright

Жыл бұрын

@@resvero8342 Heh, heh. I assume that you're quite young, so I won't laugh at you _too_ much. But that's a very silly reply.

@resvero8342

Жыл бұрын

@@Bill_Garthright Why can't you think straight? Did your mom drop you as a infant?

I was an Atheist for 15 years, and i admit i really bought into the logic and statements put out by my Atheist heroes at the time. Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, Thunderfoot, AaronRa, even Amazing Atheist. "The Demon Haunted world: Scirnce as a candle in the dark" from Carl Sagan was prettymuch my bible. It gave me alot to think about and made the idea of a God existing seem less likely to me. Ill admit, it was a foolish time and i really didnt want to think on my own. Those things sounded logical enough to me, and honestly i didnt want God at all. Even if someone proved him to be real to me back then, i'd still tell them where to go and that God was a delusion. Now, there is God in my life. I had an experience where God gave me his hand, when i was soo broken and distraught that i didnt want to wake up another day. I will always have God to credit for that. I want to be educated and i want to have a very solid understanding of my faith, and be able to tackle arguments against it.

“They are not good candidates for that position…” brilliant.

It's not a triangle. It's a square with one less side.